« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Report: Schlozman Broke The Law, Then Tried To Hide It From Senate
Here's the key excerpt, finding that Schlozman broke the law by considering political affiliations in making hiring decisions, and made false statement about it to the Senate:
The evidence in our investigation showed that Schlozman, first as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General and subsequently as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General, considered political and ideological affiliations in hiring career attorneys and in other personnel actions affecting career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division. In doing so, he violated federal law - the Civil Service Reform Act - and Department policy that prohibit discrimination in federal employment based on political and ideological affiliations, and committed misconduct. The evidence also showed that Division managers failed to exercise sufficient oversight to ensure that Schlozman did not engage in inappropriate hiring and personnel practices.Moreover, Schlozman made false statements about whether he considered political and ideological affiliations when he gave sworn testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee and in his written responses to supplemental questions from the Committee. Schlozman is no longer employed by the Department and, therefore, is not subject to disciplinary action by the Department. We recommend, however, that, if criminal prosecution is declined these findings be considered if Schlozman seeks federal employment in the
future. We believe that his violations of the merit system principles set forth in the Civil Service Reform Act, federal regulations, and Department policy, and his subsequent false statements to Congress render him unsuitable for federal service.
Josh
Zachary
So are they going to haul his ass off to court then, seeing as Schlozman has purjured himself?
January 13, 2009 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is that a rhetorical question?
January 13, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
And he got away with it. I don't know how there was no criminal prosecution here.
January 13, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
THIS is the fall guy? The DEPUTY ASSISTANT? What ever happened to Command Responsibility?
January 13, 2009 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Leahy has written his sternly worded letter. Certainly that is drastic punishment for these crimes. We must move forward, people, and not dwell in the past!
January 13, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think your vitriol against Leahy is unjustified - do you really think he has the power to buck the Democratic Leadership's Party Line? Does he have authority over the Bush Department of Justice [sic] to force them to bring prosecutions?
January 13, 2009 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt that anyone imagines that Bush's DoJ will prosecute any of their own crimes, but I'm not counting on the Obama's post-partisan DoJ to do so, either.
For that matter, I love Leahy's sternly worded letters, truly. Regarding Leahy's authority, the last 8 years have convinced me that congress has no interest in meaningful oversight, and thus whatever authority it might have is of little to no consequence to the actions of the executive branch.
January 13, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is very simple, we are a nation of men, not of laws. Those we elected to lead us, like Leahy, have utterly failed; you can point-blank lie directly to the face of the highest Judicial Senator in the land, with impunity.
Maybe we should elect someone's horse to the Senate, would be just about as effective.
January 13, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would recommend that the progeny of the entire Federatlist Society be conscripted into sex slavery.
January 13, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Watergate, Iran Contra, the entire G.W. Bush administration- there's a very simple pattern here- break the law with impunity, you will not be punished.
January 13, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
What is amazing to me is that Republicans don't give a second thought to the damage prosecuting Democrats for political crimes might have on the fabric of the nation. They just do it.
Of course Republicans depend on Democrats looking the other way -- for the good of the nation, of course.
January 13, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ack,
Congress is a fluid, changing body. I agree sadly with your conclusions with regards to the congress in the past 8 years have been particularly egregious and the lack of spine especially in the last 2 years particularly so with a, albeit slim, democratic majority. However it wasn't always this way. There were 40 years democratic congressional rule where the dems weren't afaid of policing themselves. It's sad to see how the congressional democrats have so regressed to reductio ad absurdum.
However, wouldn't you acknowledge that if individual members of congress had truly no interest in oversight, the smaller upstanding members such as Leahy wouldn't have brought these hearings in the first place.
Also, shouldn't you also withhold judgment until Obama's justice administration has been handily confirmed into power before making such assumptions about the 'move forward' rhetoric, which can be understood at the moment considering Obama wants to ensure swift confirmations of his appointments, especially one that has made no secret of targeting Holder?
January 13, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has already signaled that he is going to let bygones be bygones. We wouldn't want anybody held accountable for their politically motivated crimes, would we.
January 13, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that there are certainly some upstanding members of the Democratic caucus, and I salute them for persevering while presumably fully aware of how little chance there is that the rest of the caucus, let alone enough of the Congress, will back them up.
As for Obama, yes, I should withhold my judgment -- just sharing my pessimistic outlook. For what it's worth, I supported the Obama campaign (in ways far, far beyond my support for any other candidate for public office), and am extremely happy he will be our Prez. On the other hand, I'm quite aware that nobody who agreed with most of my positions could be elected to national office in this country, so I have every reason to anticipate that the Obama administration will take many positions and actions that will give me great anguish. So I reckon I'm just mentally preparing for the transition from joy to disappointment.
January 13, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was never the bully type, but if there was ever a dweeb in school I just wanted to slap in the back of the head, Schlozman would be the guy!
January 13, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should we really care what this report says? The bigger question is will anyone do anything serious about it, such as prosecuting him and giving him jail time for his crime, if convicted? I'm getting tired of these reports when they result in pleas bargains amounting for little more than a legal slap on the wrist. I want jail time, loss of government pensions, and disbarment for lawyers.
January 13, 2009 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
So we get to see the repugs version of Law and Order in action. Schlozman was able to get into the system, corrupt it, and make a clean get-away and there's nothing legally that can be done. The whole damn party acts more like a mafia organization that it does a political one.
January 13, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
.... and so goes the fall of our democracy.
Once you vote in folks who get to decide which laws will be violated (and by whom), the democracy has fallen... even without changing its name.
January 13, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
If part of your body is rotting from gangrene, the only way you can "look forward" is by amputation.
January 13, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Disbar the guy. Make it famous that a lawyer who acted that way ended up not a lawyer. Copies of the ruling handed out before the bar exam in every state he's ever practiced.
Disbar him, and if he shows up as a lobbyist, send letters to his clients reminding him that he is not now and will never again be allowed to practice law.
Those of us in the legal profession need to police our own.
January 13, 2009 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink