« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Document Dump Highlights
Yesterday we received the latest documents the Department of Justice handed over to Congress in the ongoing investigation into the agency.
Readers flagged two interesting pieces in our document dump thread. One email highlights the prominence of the conservative Federalist Society in the Justice Department and another raises more questions about how official processes have been carried out in the agency.
In one of the email messages flagged by readers -- and by McClatchy -- Leonard Leo the executive vice president of the Federalist Society offers then director of the Executive Office of the US Attorney his two cents in who would make a nice replacement for the US Attorney in San Diego. His suggestion was Mary Walker, who as McClatchy points out, has ties to the White House:
Walker led a Pentagon working group in 2003, which critics said helped provide the administration with a rationale to circumvent the international Geneva Conventions banning torture in the interrogations of terrorism suspects.
Leo’s recommendation is dated March 7, 2005, almost two years before Lam was fired, but just days before her name appeared on one of the firings lists.
The role of the Federalist Society has come up repeatedly during the investigation into the US attorney firings scandal. Most recently, Bradley Schlozman named the group in his testimony before a Senate panel as one approached when looking for new Justice Department hires while the head of the Civil Rights Division. (He couldn’t recall the names of liberal organizations he contacted.)
In another reader-flagged email, White House Liaison Monica Goodling tells Paul Corts, the assistant attorney general for administration, that he can send her documents delegating attorney general authority to chief of staff Kyle Sampson and herself. We already knew Alberto Gonzales gave Goodling authority to hire and fire Justice Department lawyers, as Goodling testified a few weeks ago. Goodling’s hiring and firing powers are also outlined in this order. The new email jumped out to readers because she asks Corts to take care of the delegation of power “outside the system.”
Corts says sure.
It’s not clear what process Goodling is recommending here, but it certainly doesn’t sound like the most transparent route.
Josh
Zachary
I'll say it again, I think she and Kyle are meeting after dark and not only talking about work but having some fun with it too!!!
June 7, 2007 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reading that email, I seems she is requesting the list be sent to her "outside the system". I can only imagine she is referring to using an email system other than the one that records all email traffic to maintain the requirements of the Presidential Records Act. If this is the case, it seems everyone in this administration has a clear understanding of how and when to use the "alternate" systems. If this many people are using outside email servers with the intent to circumvent the Presidential Records Act, then these people must be involved in a criminal conspiracy. When will they all be indicted?
June 7, 2007 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember, folks, that Phyllis Jones sent the WordPerfect attachment "AG's Delegation of Authority" USING the system to Michael Allen and Robert L. Marshall (2:9). She sent it on 2/15/06 at 2:52 p.m., although Monica G. made her request to keep it "outside" on 1/19. Guess no one thought to copy Phyllis about this.
code: bell, as in "It tolls for thee."
June 7, 2007 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Laura McGann, I think I may have caught a minor reporting error in your story:
Laura McGann @ Top: "Most recently, Bradley Schlozman named the group in his testimony before a Senate panel as one approached when looking for new Justice Department hires while the head of the Civil Rights Division. (He couldn’t recall the names of liberal organizations he contacted.)"
If I remember correctly, having watched the hearings, Schlozman did remember the liberal groups he had contacted and eventually admitted who they were: none.
However, Schlozman continued to insist he'd had underlings reach out to liberal groups -- when questioned he couldn't name any, and instead named groups representing minorities.
In other words, the parenthetical should probably read something like:
(Schlozman admitted he personally had not contacted any liberal groups, but insisted he had assistants do so -- though he could not name any of the liberal groups he believed they had contacted.)
Admittedly, it's kind of awkward, but then, so was Schlozman's testimony on the subject.
June 7, 2007 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet Phil Spector wishes he had been an administration official right now.
June 8, 2007 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why did the DOJ release these now? Are they throwing Goodling under the bus because she threw Tim Griffin under the bus for the vote caging program? Perhaps they want to damage her enough to keep her from being credible in future hearings.
Also, because she had immunity, and she brought up the caging, does she know have protection from any criminal liability for any part she played in it? No one at the hearings asked her much about the caging, but she didn't hide it.
June 8, 2007 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
My guess is that they all know the caging factor will be the one that busts their butts. Goodling brought it up so it can be included in any future defense manuevers to invoke the immunity agreement.
Palast gets little respect for pointing trhe caging story out, and notice how the MSM won't touch it? But the caging story, once unraveled, will create a serious movement among serious voter-rights advocates to purge the entire system of any semblance of this new form of anti-democratic government, (call it Bushism) and create stop-gap measures to assure it never happens again.
And if Goodling herself felt the need to reference "caging", there's a very good chance they ALL consider it is one of the cornerstones of their entire illegal tabernacle of deception. Just how deep and sopphisticated the program was is anyone's guess, Palast's expose' is just a snapshot from a much longer video.
Goodling's lawyer has fired a "caging" warning shot across the bow of the USS Gonzales.
Apparently, they all know it is an issue with teeth, even if the public and it's lazy watchdogs act numbly disinterested. It's just too technical an issue, and there's just not enough sex and violence...
June 8, 2007 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps Goodling's lawyer wanted her to bring the issue of "caging" into her testimony to use her immunity to prevent her from being prosecuted for it later. And perhaps questioners were reticent/reluctant to question her on it so that her immunity wouldn't prevent her from being prosecuted for it later.
June 8, 2007 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Was Monica Goodling ever questioned on the other cummunication systems that she used outside of the official e-mail systems? She specifically instructs to have a lsit sent to her directly, which is likely an unofficial e-mail. Find the alternate communication systems and you will find your criminal evidence.
June 8, 2007 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rodney, after reading your post I'm wondering were these communications "outside the system" secure as say ones inside the system?
June 8, 2007 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi all!
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
G'night
January 11, 2008 12:54 AM | Reply | Permalink