« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Schlozman Admits Touting GOP Qualifications of Prospective Prosecutors
In written answers to questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee, Bradley Schlozman, the former Justice Department official and U.S. attorney who's been at the center of the firings controversy, admitted that he'd once urged hiring certain prosecutors for his office based on their political affiliation. It's against civil service laws to do so.
But he had a reason, he explains (how good a reason, you can decide for yourself). When serving as the interim U.S. attorney for Kansas City, Schlozman had been unable to hire assistant U.S. attorneys on his own, as Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys are able to do. For that, he had to go through the central office, or in this case, Monica Goodling, the Department's White House liaison. He'd "heard rumors," he writes,"that Ms. Goodling considered political affiliation in approving hiring decisions for career positions." Goodling, of course, admitted in testimony to Congress that she'd made sure that only Republicans were hired for certain non-political positions.
And so, Schlozman explains, in order to "maximize the chances" of being able to hire his desired candidate, he "once noted the likely political leanings of several applicants" in a conversation with Department officials.
But there was no damage done! Schlozman adds that none of his desired candidates were hired.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has forwarded Schlozman's responses to DoJ Inspector General Glenn Fine, who's investigating the politicization of the hiring process in the Department. "These belated answers confirm the serious concerns that have been raised about the role Mr. Schlozman and other senior Justice Department officials played in screening career employees for political loyalty," says Leahy.
Elsewhere in the answers, Schlozman denies having hired applicants based on their political affiliation both during his time as a senior official in the Civil Rights Division or his tenure as U.S. attorney. Lawyers were hired based on "a comprehensive review" of their experience and background, he writes.
That's not the impression he gave to one potential hire, who told TPMmuckraker that Schlozman only considered hiring an acquaintance of his after asking whether the applicant was a Republican. Other attorneys have said that Schlozman had sought to replace lawyers hired during the Clinton administration with what he called "good Americans."
Schlozman finally left the Department only late last month.
Josh
Zachary
It took him this long to blame it on the one with immunity?
September 7, 2007 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
What else is Bradley doing with his time these days? Is he suckling from the teat in a new role elsewhere in the party?
September 7, 2007 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
So he's saying he broke the law because he had heard that one of his superiors was breaking the law and he had to go along? That would be pretty much as good an example of being part of a criminal enterprise as you could ask for.
(It used to be the republicans relied on the incompetence defense, but now that that onee is used up they're falling back on "I was just a conscienceless toady." So much for the party of principles.)
September 7, 2007 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
without the GOP stupid factory, this guy would be the worlds ugliest McDonalds employee.
September 7, 2007 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
without the GOP stupid factory, this guy would be the worlds ugliest McDonalds employee.
September 7, 2007 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ther he is folks, the poster boy for the macho lantern-jawed conservative he-men that populate bushco.
code:snake...of course
September 7, 2007 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a good thing there are no longer any penalties for lying during congressional hearings. Under our old democracy this guy would have been in serious trouble.
Apparently, as the democrats told us before we elected them... "We will be doing things differently..."
September 7, 2007 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
So in order to "maximize the chances" of hiring right wingers he admits to violating the law? And of course if the were a Democrat he likewise would "minimum the chances" of being hired.
September 7, 2007 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bradley Scholzman: On sale now at a men's room stall near you.
September 7, 2007 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bradley Scholzman: On sale now at a men's room stall near you.
September 7, 2007 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
The DOJ Civil Rights division is ignoring a huge tremendous infraction of the ADA law, on purpose.... * duh* surprise.........
September 7, 2007 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought these laws were written for lesser people. I was told bu$$hCo does not/will never follow the laws meant for the common people. We are above,.. we are beyond - all that.
September 7, 2007 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has the world turned upside down? Is a former US Attorney now claiming that he knowingly violated civil service laws, but because his scheme was not successful he should avoid sanction?
Every Democrat or Independent that applied for job during that period of time should sue. They're all lawyers, let's see if DOJ indemnifies him.
Code Word: Poison. Ain't that the truth!
September 7, 2007 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
We've moved beyond probable cause; Schlozman should be arrested immediately. He openly admits to having violated Civil Service laws.
It's the weekend; can we please see AP photos of him being frog-marched to the back of a waiting sheriff's SUV by Monday, please?
September 8, 2007 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Every Democrat or Independent that applied for job during that period of time should sue."
Might one reasonably consider this a class-action?
It should be very easy to prove, there's a long list of rejects whose only fault was political affiliation, and much shorter list of successful applicants who were acceptably affiliated.
You can't change the truth, it is all there on the books for a class-action lawsuit.
September 8, 2007 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Class action lawsuits are fine, but I'm really pimping for RICO Act violations. Contact your Senators and Congressmen and demand action. Let them know that having you as an unhappy constituent means continuous trouble for them in the future. A visit to a District office and a talk with the local staff is the best way to get a clear message to your Congressman. Making an effort is 80% of the battle. Congress is primarily composed of lawyers, and they know this is illegal activity which undermines respect for the law.
Why did we pass the freaking Civil Service Laws in the first place? To stop and punish assholes like Schlozman.
September 8, 2007 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
"world's ugliest McDonald's employee".
with a voice too high to work the drive thru window.
September 8, 2007 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Schlozman, just another presidential pardonee. If the democrats were smart -but they're not - they'd wait until after GWB leaves to file charges. (Please correct me, someone, if that's wrong).
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
September 8, 2007 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's also not forget that Schlotzman violated his office by filing charges against ACORN in Missouri, which was enrolling voters in poor districts, on the eve of the '04 election, with the sole intent of affecting the election outcome.
As a Missourian, I well remember the headlines of the casting a pall over the election. Though the scheme failed -- Claire McCaskill won a narrow victory to unseat Senator Jim Talent -- Schlotzman and the whole of the intent to influence elections must not go unpunished.
September 9, 2007 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Pompano Pete Jr,
Could you spell out more clearly the procedure for walking into your congresman's office and asking that they prosecute Schlozman? I mean, rattling off the Schloz talking points to the receptionist or whomever is at the front desk doesn't sound useful. However, I just moved to a city in Virginia where I doubt too many people are following the DoJ story, and I am keen to raise consciousness. Please advise.
thank you.
September 9, 2007 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is it just me, or does this make it sound like he was trying to get laid? Didn't get laid, didn't get his employees, and broke the law to boot. What a loser.
September 9, 2007 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
None of this matters. Nothing will be done. None of the Loyal Bushies[tm] will be punished for their lawless acts. After six years of this and seeing them get away with it I've become a political cynic.
A year will go by, more will die in Iraq, more partisan republican hacks will be given cushy government jobs...next year perhaps a Dem will be elected President and the corruption will continue...
September 10, 2007 1:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
He is lying. He considered political affiliation, and female looks for non-conseratives. Note no non-conservative men were hired during his tenure at Civil Rights. Although, you all seem to act like conservative attorneys are not qualified to do the job in Civil Rights. Did you ever consider the political affilitations of those career civil serverants who normally control the hiring process? Do you think any of those conservative attorneys would stand a chance without a like minded individual doing the hiring? The problem with Brad is that he was stupid enough to brag and get caught.
September 11, 2007 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink