« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
U.S. Attorney Resignation Made on Threat of Immediate Firing
When a Justice Department official asked eight U.S. attorneys for their resignations last December, most of them went quietly (initially at least), agreeing to resign on relatively short notice and with no public fuss. But one U.S. attorney, Carol Lam in San Diego, had contentious private exchanges with Department officials about her end date.
An email released to Congress last week shows just how heated those discussions got. When Lam delayed announcing her date of resignation -- wanting more time to tend to several high profile cases, the expanded Duke Cunningham investigation among them --, Justice Department officials prepared to have the president fire her immediately.
The email was amongst those (pdf) released by the Justice Department to Congress last week. Writing to William Kelley, an attorney in the White House counsel's office, Kyle Sampson, Alberto Gonzales' former chief of staff and the orchestrator of the U.S. attorney firings, wrote:
FYI – our USA in SD is refusing to resign (though we’ve given her until 5pm eastern); recommendation that she be removed immediately should be over to you by the end of the day.
The January 16th email was written just as the U.S. attorney firings controversy was beginning to simmer. On January 12th, The San Diego Union-Tribune first reported Lam's firing. The next day, the paper quoted the head of the San Diego FBI office as saying "I guarantee politics is involved” in Lam's firing. And on January 16th, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) made her way to the Senate floor to announce her concern and suspicion about the U.S. attorney firings (which had just become public).
If Lam had not announced her resignation that day, apparently, the Justice Department would have moved to have her fired -- something that can only occur by presidential order. Lam, however, gave in and announced on January 16th that she would be stepping down February 15th.
The announcement followed a number of apparently acrimonious discussions Lam had with Michael Elston, the chief of staff to the deputy attorney general. As Lam detailed in written testimony to Congress, Elston had warned Lam since early January that her requests for more time based on "case-related considerations" was "'not being received positively'" at the Department. He told Lam to “stop thinking in terms of the cases in the office," that she had to depart in "a matter of weeks, not months," and that "these instructions were 'coming from the very highest levels of the government.'"
The email released last week shows just how close the "highest levels of the government" came to firing Lam when she insisted on an "orderly transition" (her words) for pending investigations.
It's clear that the Justice Department was in a hurry to have Lam and the other fired U.S. attorneys step down. What's not clear is why.
In Sampson's plan for the firings, sent out by email on December 4th to Justice Department and White House officials, he said that U.S. attorneys' pleas for more time were to firmly rebuffed. The prosecutors were to resign by January 31st. Granting extensions, he wrote, would "hinder the process of getting a new U.S. Attorney in place and giving that person the opportunity to serve for a full two years."
But it's far from clear that such a delay would have affected the replacement process at all. In testimony before the Senate in March, Sampson said that no replacements had been identified for the U.S. attorneys when they were fired in December. And even at this late date, the president has still not nominated a replacement for Lam -- Lam's Executive Assistant United States Attorney Karen Hewitt has been serving as an interim since February 16th.
So why the hurry in getting Lam out of the office? The Justice Department still hasn't provided a convincing explanation.
What's clear is that Lam was in something of a hurry during her busy, final days on the job, securing two historic indictments of the former Executive Director of the CIA Dusty Foggo and defense contractor Brent Wilkes, who's alleged to have bribed both Cunningham and Foggo, and obtaining a guilty plea for the internal financier Thomas Kontogiannis, who admitted to channeling corrupt payments to Cunningham in order to meet public figures like President Bush and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
Comments (55)
As pointed out by previous commenters, Carol Lam's firing was too hot to be handled separately, as were the earlier removals of Todd Graves, Tom Heffelfinger, and Debra Yang. The simultaneous firing of eight was to provide cover for yanking Lam.
"It's clear that the Justice Department was in a hurry to have Lam and the other fired U.S. attorneys step down. What's not clear is why."
There may well be a number of California Republican Congressmen who know why.
June 19, 2007 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
wow, this just ain't going away...
June 19, 2007 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carol Lam is at the epicenter of the whole U.S. Attorney firing scandal. Break this one open and bring down an administration. Obstruction of justice, pure and simple.
June 19, 2007 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Debra Yang thing is incredibly suspicious in that she got millions in signing bonuses to join the firm of a guy she was investigating.
June 19, 2007 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
BD--I totally agree on the Yang thing. That piques my suspicion even more than the Lam story.
June 19, 2007 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its seems OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE is staring us right in the face.
June 19, 2007 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Until a lot of people start going to jail for this- and I truly hate to say this- the Democratic leadership will continue to look weak to the point of impotence.
Smart defense attorneys all over the country are getting their ducks in a row to start pointing the finger back at DOJ on their motivation for prosecutions; and like everything else the GOP touches, the taint left by this scandal could ultimately wreck any reasonable persons view that the DOJ is anything other than a tool of political persuasion.
June 19, 2007 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Department of Justice initially opposed awarding a sole-source contract to Bajagua. But when the DOJ attorney originally assigned to handle the case, Randall Humm, was replaced in 2003 by DOJ attorney and liaison to the Office of the Vice President, Mary Neumayr, the Justice Department reversed its position abruptly.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Whistleblowers_allege_influence_peddling_by_members_0329.html
"Mary has been essential in making sure that conservative legal ideas see the light of day in the Bay Area," says Leonard Leo, Director of the Lawyer's Division in Washington, D.C. (Leonard Leo, who is executive vice president of the Federalist Society). "She has good strategic judgment and has been able to present our ideas in a way that commands the respect of people who might not otherwise agree with us."
http://www.thomasaquinas.edu/news/newsletter/2000/winter/neumayr.htm
June 19, 2007 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I almost wish they HAD fired Lam. The whole thing would have blown up sooner.
June 19, 2007 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
If they had fired Lam before she got her indictments in they would have been handed off to a Republican, meaning they would have been buried.
June 19, 2007 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/05/10/gonzales-on-deb-yang-and-gibson-dunn-part-ii/
Sanchez: Okay. Are you aware — and this has been reported in the press — that when she was hired by the firm, Ms. Yang was conducting an active investigation into Republican Congressman Jerry Lewis and his financial dealings with a particular lobbying firm? Were you aware of that?
Gonzales: I may have been aware of that. Sitting here today, I can’t say — I can’t say that I was aware of that. But that is very likely. ...
Sanchez: So you’re not concerned even with the appearance of conflicts of interest. It doesn’t trouble you at all.
Gonzales: I’m always concerned about the appearance of a conflict –
Sanchez: Especially at a point when the Justice Department is under scrutiny, the morale is probably at the lowest that it’s been in decades, and people are questioning the integrity of the DOJ to act in an even-handed and fair manner.
Gonzales: Of course, as head of the department, I’m always concerned about the appearance and the perception. Of course I am. But again, this is more of a perception for the law firm as opposed to the Department of Justice, because as far as I know, we had nothing to do with placing with Ms. Yang in that law firm. And as far as I know, nothing has been — nothing about that investigation has been impacted or affected in any way by virtue of her going to work in that firm.
June 19, 2007 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could the connection involve Preston M. “Pete” Geren III, who's being pushed for Sec. of Army. Also buddy w/ House Armed Service Committee chairman Duncan Hunter (R-CA), another mix in Cunningham corruption, and they also co-own a rural VA cabin. See: http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2006/06/hunters_brand_o.html
June 19, 2007 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is it right here. This will establish the legacy of this hapless fool of a president as the worst, most corrupt in US history.
June 19, 2007 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, above, meant to say EX-Chair vis-a-vis Hunter!
June 19, 2007 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gonzales said 'I may have known' about pending cases that would be affected by replacing the USA. Shouldn't he have looked into possible effects BEFORE he fired people?
Then Gonzales says twice "as far as I know ..." This sounds like he intentionally didn't educate himself so that he could later claim he didn't know.
June 19, 2007 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Federalist Society's Scalia junior at Gibson Dunn -- but Goodling's DOJ didn't have anything to do with placing Yang there. Yeah, right.
"Eugene Scalia has been selected by American Lawyer as one of the 50 leading litigators in the country age 45 or under. The list is featured in the magazine's January 2007 issue [PDF]. Scalia is with Gibson Dunn's Washington, D.C. office. He co-chairs the firm's Labor and Employment Practice Group and chairs the Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice Group."
http://www.gibsondunn.com/news/firm/detail/id/526/?pubItemId=8341
June 19, 2007 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is so sickening....
June 19, 2007 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to take issue with the following statement in your article:
It's clear that the Justice Department was in a hurry to have Lam and the other fired U.S. attorneys step down. What's not clear is why.
They weren't in that big a hurry in the other cases. Only one was told no extensions. Only one worried Kyle Sampson enough to say they needed to have a replacement ready the day her term expired. Only one was threatened with firing. Only one was told to resign less than a month after her term expired. The DOJ was in a hurry to get rid of Carol Lam. They wanted to get rid of the others, but the urgency was all about Lam.
I would say the reason for that urgency is clear. They were worried about the investigations she was leading.
June 19, 2007 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only one person in the Bush Administration has enough clout to perform any task quickly and that is Cheney himself. Everybody else has to run their ideas past Cheney. So if Lam was fired quickly with no ifs-ands-or-buts then that had to come directly from Cheney. If it came from anyone else, Harriet Miers would have to run it by The Chief.
I wonder if Cheney's computers from MZM had anything to do with this.
"Wade’s company, MZM Inc., rocketed from a shell organization with no revenues in 2001 to one of the top 100 federal contractors in 2005 with revenues of more than $66 million. MZM’s first government contract came in 2002. It was for $140,000 to provide “furniture” to the White House."
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/02/foggo.html
June 19, 2007 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm willing to bet there is a direct, incriminating connection between Cheney and the So California Republican Corruption Club. If it isn't MZM (I suspect that fear of Cheney being linked to Cunningham, Lewis, Hunter, etc., was why Lam was fired), then it is something we don't know about. Yet.
June 19, 2007 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I called her office shortly after the January 12th Union Trib article came out STRONGLY urging her to stay and fight their efforts to get rid of her. I also called into Scooter's Air America show on KLSD on Sunday morning to encourage other San Diegans to do the same! I hope we helped give her the courage to stand up to these bums!
I find it interesting that Carol Lam QUICKLY got a job at Qualcom after she left the USA office where Brent Scowcroft is on the board. Scowcroft is also working with AIPAC (Israel's PAC) and ATC (Turkey's PAC) which both arguably have been pressuring congress to keep plans open for attacking Iran, even though there are polls indicating that most Israelis DON'T want us to attack Iran. With Cunningham, Hunter, MZM, Wilkes, Foggo, etc. all in these defense aquisition chains, this seems suspicious too.
Also, a few suspicious things happened around my house after I called Congressman Waxman's committee to suggest that they call in Duncan Hunter's Democratic opponent John Rinaldi, who when I talked to him seemed to know in advance of the 2006 congressional election inside information that Hunter was likely going to get indicted, but AFTER the election because the powers that be wanted it to be a special election to replace him, not a Tom Delay situation. With what's happened to Carol Lam, this sounds even more suspicious to me now!
June 19, 2007 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
This dump seems to have all sorts of fun bits in it; for 46 pages it's one of the most illuminating thus far IMO. Some highlights:
1. Kyle Sampson left a rambling message on Kenneth Lee's voicemail about Carol Lam's firing. I wonder what he said? The general gist of this dump is that much went on in private conversations or over the phone that probably wasn't recorded. I suspect the same is true for their Blackberry traffic. (pdf page 8)
2. There was already a fair amount that'd transpired in the case of Bud Cummins by December 15, 2006. Which is odd, because the scandal hadn't kicked in by that date. What else happened? (pdf page 10)
3. I'd like to see their review of the "FAUSA" (is that Karen Hewitt?). Karen Hewitt is noted above as being the Executive Assistant USA prior to becoming the acting USA, is that the same as the FAUSA? If not, who is that and why were they passed over for the position? (pdf page 12)
4. Who is Kyle Sampson talking to on pdf page 14? There's no identifying information at all and most of the details are redacted.
5. Was Dan Dzwilewski punished for his statements about politics being "definitely involved" in the firing of Carol Lam? They certainly intended to at least talk to him about it. It was important enough to go all the way up to the Director of the FBI (via his counsel, Lisa Monaco). (pdf page 18)
6. What did William Kelley mean when he wrote to Kyle Sampson that "...we are convinced that they have disloyally stirred up the Senators"? I assume he's talking about the fired USAs. That implies a few things, including that the USAs violated the Administration's omerta code and talked about why they were really fired. After all, if they were lying about the reasons for their firings, then I think he'd accuse them of lying rather than being disloyal. (pdf page 25)
7. A golden statement by Sampson: "If Lam was asked to resign, it would have been b/c she lost the confidence of the AG and DAG. I'm not sure we'd ever feel confortable abt sharing outside of DOJ internal employee evaluations." Ha! That discomfort disappeared pretty quickly. I like how he phrases this as an "if" -- "if" Lam was asked to resign. If he only knew then how big of a scandal this would be... (pdf page 33)
8. In relation to number 7 above, Sampson sticks to the number -- 8 -- who were asked to resign. Others are mentioned, but none as being asked to resign. Two pages down he puts asked to resign in quotes, so it was a fluid definition even though he tried to peddle it to Bruce Cohen and Jennifer Duck as solid. (pdf pgs. 33 - 35)
9. If Charlton and McKay's resignations were already public, what did they need to be protected from? (pdf pg. 36). Also, note on pg 37 that no reason is given for Todd Graves' resignation even though he went into private practice (but they do note it for Deborah Yang). Why?
10. While Kyle Sampson states throughout his emails about the firings that there was every intention to consult with home state Senators about USA appointments, he was dead set on Tim Griffin replacing Cummins as interim USA. To the point that he didn't want to give the impression that they'd withdraw Griffin's name if Sen. Pryor didn't approve (pdf page 38).
11. Was Cummins penance for speaking to the press a letter in support of Griffin? Perhaps they threatened him with besmirching his name if he didn't write it. (pdf page 40). There's definitely a strong streak of retribution in this bunch.
June 19, 2007 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carol Lam ought to stop being such a good Republican and tell Congress EXACTLY what she knows about what was going on. I think it's pretty obvious she's still holding back.
June 19, 2007 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
John Rinaldi here is noted for asking Duncan Hunter to resign before the election and avoid the expense of a "special election", which is consistent with what he told me earlier...
http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=14566
June 19, 2007 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Node of Evil,
Actually Carol Lam is now a registered independent instead of a Republican that she was when she was appointed by the Bush administration.
If anyone has access to public records where this info might be stored, I would think it would be an interesting piece of info to find out WHEN she switched from being a Republican to an independent, to see if that event was a RESULT of what the Justice Department was doing to her, or if it factored into being a REASON she was fired. If she switched to being Republican before 2000 election that would also be interesting to find out too, to see if she did so to put herself in position to be nominated as a USA too.
June 19, 2007 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heh, the code word is "clean."
Carol Lam is definitely at the heart of the the attorney purge.
June 19, 2007 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's Titan Corp that the Bush Administration is really worried about, not Duke Cunningham. Just a hunch..
June 19, 2007 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11524
info on Titan's involvement with torture, contracts etc. They really smell bad.
sv is soap. ha!
June 19, 2007 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11524
info on Titan's involvement with torture, contracts etc. They really smell bad.
sv is soap. ha!
June 19, 2007 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
That woman is an american hero. Plain and simple. God bless her.
June 19, 2007 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
"An email released last week shows that purgemeister Kyle Sampson was hours away from asking the president to fire Lam not because she wouldn't resign, but because she wanted more time on the job to handle her very important prosecutions."
And then you quote the email, which says "FYI – our USA in SD is refusing to resign."
Sounds like Sampson's email says he wanted her fired because she refused to resign.
Why not call it quits with the shitty sensational headlines and story ledes? TPM Media used to represent quality; now more often than not, it represents the same garbage that the MSM represents.
Surely there's enough actual bad stuff happening with this administration that you don't really need to exaggerate or make crap up?
Josh, please wake the f*** up and straighten your folks out.
June 19, 2007 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who was she investigating, (and she wanted to follow thru on the cases) - that it needed to be stopped in its tracks ? Has anyone followed up in those cases in her offices after she left ? ?
June 19, 2007 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey JP are you trolling ?- All you Bushevik lurkers leave Josh & TPM alone Ok ? And I have said this before & I will say it again.The TurdBlossomExpress , the BrownShirt Brook Brothers , The MZM Mitch Wades, The NeoFascist Lawyers Yoo & Addington, OVPers working for Shooter Cheney - this whole criminal conspriracy is going to blow up !!Why is it going to blow up because all the "Questions " have already been answered - the Committes of Jurisdiction are simply building their respective cases- and waiting for the right moment to take down once and for all the BushCo criminal enterprise.
You can bet that the career prosecutors that worked with & for Yang ,before Scalia Jr bribed her with the 1.5 million dollars- have all been deposed by the Hill Staffers- regarding obstructing justice in the cases of several SoCal Republican Congressmen . ( Lets not forget that we also have Ted Olson's testimony on record regarding Gonzo & Cards little sideshow at the Ashcroft hosptial bed side re warrantless wiretaps.. ) And all the other "stuff " that has been discovered by the Hill Staffers. You betchum - its gonna be just like a scene out of HUD when this sucker blows - There will not be a NeoCon , Or Bushevik left standing ...
June 19, 2007 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I commend TPM for your magnificent coverage of this riveting chapter of the American experience. There is no doubt in my mind that Alberto and his gang have broken the law to protect these western hoodlums. They have obstructed justice! They have intimidated witnesses! They have abused power! They have acted treasonously to obstruct cases involving bribery, and kickbacks from defense contractors to congressmen and CIA officials! They have also covered up their own criminal acts with equivocation and obfuscation. These cases involve our very national security, but Alberto would not see the great service that Lam had done for America. By firing her, this administration through its cronies in the DOJ made it clear that they were the boss and Lam was the employee. In a temporal sense, that is correct, but as a representative of justice, she, Lam towers above their bloated idea of themselves. She really did her job and deserves America's greatest praise! They are but ceremonial placeholders who have failed in everything that they have attempted including the scuttling of our nation and its laws!
June 19, 2007 10:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
JP
Josh has no control over the shitty people who are the subject of the headlines. When will you assholes figure it out? You republicans are your own worst enemy.
Why do people who receive bad news want to shoot the messenger?
June 19, 2007 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was at first suspicious of Ms. Lam. She came into town and almost immediately started a City Council case against two dems.
But then she caged Cunningham when the Union Tribune broke the scandal and her follow up had been superb. Not a Bushie at all.
Sorry to see Carol leave her office with the job not finished. I agree that she was the main focus of the firings.
June 20, 2007 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was at first suspicious of Ms. Lam. She came into town and almost immediately started a City Council case against two dems.
But then she caged Cunningham when the Union Tribune broke the scandal and her follow up had been superb. Not a Bushie at all.
Sorry to see Carol leave her office with the job not finished. I agree that she was the main focus of the firings.
June 20, 2007 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kyle Sampson may have wished the Administration would back him up and fire Lam, but I really doubt they would've done it. Bullies don't back people up, they let others take the fall.
June 20, 2007 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Al in Austex, I hope and pray you're right. I'm reeling from the fact our country has been turned on its head by the antics of Bush and Company. I PRAY PRAY PRAY that the law will put him in his place. God help us all.
SC: blood, as in "This administration is spilling the blood of American citizens all over the world."
June 20, 2007 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Notice how involved the White House was in Carol Lam's not-firing. Kyle Sampson emailed Bill Kelley at 1:57 PM with news of Lam's 5 PM deadline. At 1:58 PM, Bill Kelley had already forwarded the message to Ms.(Not a Supreme) Harriet Miers.
Impressive action for a White House that can barely remember, never mind be involved in, the incident in question.
Code word: right
June 20, 2007 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Until a lot of people start going to jail for this- and I truly hate to say this- the Democratic leadership will continue to look weak to the point of impotence."
Pro-Bushit horseshit by a coward who hasn't the courtesy to identify himself.
Tell us, pray tell, why the Democratic leadership will look "weak" for having investigated and revealed so much about Bushit, et al., in as short a time as six months.
And how they are to send people to jail.
And you are silent about the foot-dragging REPUBLICANS. Is that the fault of the Democrats too?
"[DOJ] a tool of political persuasion."
But let's not look at Special Prsecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whose career shows that it can be done non-politically.
Posted by:
Date: June 19, 2007 05:06 PM
June 20, 2007 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Until a lot of people start going to jail for this- and I truly hate to say this- the Democratic leadership will continue to look weak to the point of impotence."
Pro-Bushit horseshit by a coward who hasn't the courtesy to identify himself.
Tell us, pray tell, why the Democratic leadership will look "weak" for having investigated and revealed so much about Bushit, et al., in as short a time as six months.
And how they are to send people to jail.
And you are silent about the foot-dragging REPUBLICANS. Is that the fault of the Democrats too?
"[DOJ] a tool of political persuasion."
But let's not look at Special Prsecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whose career shows that it can be done non-politically.
Posted by:
Date: June 19, 2007 05:06 PM
June 20, 2007 1:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Until a lot of people start going to jail for this- and I truly hate to say this- the Democratic leadership will continue to look weak to the point of impotence."
Pro-Bushit horseshit by someone lacking the courtesy to identify himself.
Tell us, pray tell, why the Democratic leadership will look "weak" for having investigated and revealed so much about Bushit, et al., in as short a time as six months.
And how they are to send people to jail.
And why are silent about the foot-dragging REPUBLICANS. Is that the fault of the Democrats too?
"[DOJ] a tool of political persuasion."
But let's not look at Special Prsecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whose career shows that it can be done non-politically.
Posted by:
Date: June 19, 2007 05:06 PM
June 20, 2007 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Until a lot of people start going to jail for this- and I truly hate to say this- the Democratic leadership will continue to look weak to the point of impotence."
Pro-Bushit horseshit by someone lacking the courtesy to identify himself.
Tell us, pray tell, why the Democratic leadership will look "weak" for having investigated and revealed so much about Bushit, et al., in as short a time as six months.
And how they are to send people to jail.
And why are silent about the foot-dragging REPUBLICANS. Is that the fault of the Democrats too?
"[DOJ] a tool of political persuasion."
But let's not look at Special Prsecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, whose career shows that it can be done non-politically.
Posted by:
Date: June 19, 2007 05:06 PM
June 20, 2007 1:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bindarra,
This is "Checks & Balances 101 " & a co-equal branch of government doing exactly what the Founding Framers of our Constitution said must be done when we had thrown out our First King George.
Fear not the Republicants Busheviks , for they are all bullies & cowards --that have been called out . And like all true bullies & cowards -when push comes to shove - they do all fade away.
To paraphrase Mr Dylan .."A hard rain is gonna fall - on BushCo et al " And sooner rather then later too - go read the sentencing statement that SP Prosecutor Fitzgerald submitted to the Court for Libby. The OVP/Cheney office is up its eyeballs in the Cunningham, Lewis , Earmarks Scandal.Yep , Bindarra , keep praying -but rest easy that Civics 101 is fixing to kick in here before Christmas for sure.
Meanwhile , JP please be kind to Josh & TPM Crew, at least have common courtesy while your lurking- trolling - Ok ?!
June 20, 2007 5:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if Ms. Lam thought she might damage the cases underway if she forced BushCo to fire her rather than resign. BushCo would have had to spin up something unflattering to this US Attorney as reason to fire her. Perhaps she felt that would have sullied the cases her office was developing.
June 20, 2007 5:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can't figure out the WHY of the firing? Please, the government is now fully run by criminals and the DOJ is a joke . . . as long as papers such as the WaPo and NYT have influence the status quo will continue w/quail feasting Deans and other store bought phonies protecting these thugs who have sold out the public completely and destroyed the Republic . . . $8 Billion in cash "missing" in Iraq, voter supression operations at home, politically motivated prosecutions orchestrated at the highest levels of government but overall the major media is aok w/it all . . . your "news" brought to you by multimillionaires involved in class war against you . . . pathetic.
June 20, 2007 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
My observation, right or wrong, is the people in the WH, Miers, Jennings, Taylor and DOJ, Gonzales, McNulty, Sampson, Goodling and others, were trying to write a screenplay and cast the members without getting the consent of those targeted for the epic. The legal minds at main justice and the WH have been less than stellar. My judgement; lame. Too much Regent? What is it about the truth that evades these cretins? Instead of telling it as it is , they try to manipulate the situation and get in deeper doodoo. Don't they ever know when it is time to stop digging?
Code word: black. They tried writing a screenplay in the BLACK genre.
June 20, 2007 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
"It's clear that the Justice Department was in a hurry to have Lam and the other fired U.S. attorneys step down. What's not clear is why."
This is taking circumspection to a fault. It's completely clear why. They didn't want those indictments against Foggo and Wilkes to be brought, and they didn't want those cases developed.
June 20, 2007 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
This line just sums up the modern GOP perfectly...
[Elston] told Lam to “stop thinking in terms of the cases in the office," [...] and that "these instructions were 'coming from the very highest levels of the government.'"
Yup. Don't worry about the cases, your job or, you know, justice or anything. The Party boys in D.C have some politcal concerns...
Is it 2008 yet?
June 20, 2007 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
How does one KNOW the "reasons" for firing someone without KNOWING WHO suggested she be fired for those "reasons" in the first place? Elston stated that "these instructions were coming from the very highest levels of the government." WHO were the people "from the very highest levels of the government" he was referring to? WHY were they in such a hurry? What was so important to them that they had to threaten to fire her to get her to resign? WHO told Elston that "case-related considerations" was "not being received positively" at the Department" and that Carol Lam should be told to “stop thinking in terms of the cases in the office," that she had to depart in "a matter of weeks, not months". How could Elston not name the names of the individuals "from the very highest levels of the government" who instructed him to say those things to Carol Lam in the context of threatening to fire her if she didn't quit within the time frame they dictated?
June 20, 2007 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure is a good thing we don't have that pesky independent counsel law any more.
June 20, 2007 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Elston is the key here. He must be working out quite a deal for himself if he hasn't been paraded in high profile hearings yet.
June 20, 2007 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
When you think about it, of all the US Attorneys fired here, who was the only one who had name recognition? Who had a case that everybody knew about?
What pisses me off more than anything is the fact that these stupid, ignorant, assholes, all of these unqualified, and especially, I don't have the word for them, I keep thinking of the Enron manipulators who just laughed at the notion of Grandma Millie getting her energy cut off with no thought or connection to anybody as people, you can't really call them sociopaths for the most part, yes some are, but so unconnected to the basics of society and community, I mean, do they have any sort of life away from work, do they talk to their neighbors or other people, or are they all so socially inept that they view people as things, not people?
Well, I've digressed, but what really pisses me off the most is the fact that these people like Goodling and Sampson, not to mention Rover, keep winning, keep their fevered clawhold on power, keep beating the all too human Democrats time after time.
Christ, they aren't that smart Dems, kick their fucking asses already!!
June 21, 2007 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
gtkf qfgb xhuvgd hwgus xuyant mcav xnkibyqjf
July 8, 2007 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink