Comments (31)

Johann wrote on March 5, 2007 3:26 PM:

"Recently, each of us was asked by Department of Justice officials to resign our posts."

Will the committees have the balls to ask: "Who were those DOJ officials?" and then subpoena those officials to find out who ordered them to request these resignations.

Otherwise, this whole investigation is a cover-up and a waste of time.

EH wrote on March 5, 2007 3:35 PM:

I think we can assume "yes."

za wrote on March 5, 2007 3:37 PM:

Well, Josh says that Michael Battle made the phone calls. And he's resigned his post today as Executive Office for United States Attorneys. I doubt that he had much to do with this. The wusses at DOJ couldn't even fire them on their own????

Jesus.

za wrote on March 5, 2007 3:39 PM:

er, that's Executive Director of The Executive Office for United States Attorneys.

RCR wrote on March 5, 2007 3:46 PM:

FYI - Bud Cummins is from Little Rock, Arkansas, not Arizona.

Google_This wrote on March 5, 2007 3:50 PM:

Looks to me like Battle may have resigned because he was ordered to make the calls.

Will he be subpoenaed to testify?

Let's hope.

Ott wrote on March 5, 2007 3:50 PM:

"Toward that end, we also believed that within the many prosecutorial priorities established by the Department of Justice, we had the obligation to pursue those priorities by deploying our office resources in the manner that best and most efficiently addressed the needs of our districts.
[...]
We viewed it as a part of our duties to engage in discussion about these priorities with our colleagues and superiors at the Justice Department. When we had new ideas or differing opinions, we assumed that such thoughts would always be welcomed by the Department and could be freely and openly debated within the halls of that great institution."

Isn't the tone of this particular part of the statement a bit interesting? Especially the last sentence? Seems like they want to follow up with "In hindsight...".

Allsburg wrote on March 5, 2007 3:56 PM:

AR, AZ--what's the difference? Besides, Arizona starts with "Ar" too. Why should Arkansas get "AR"?

salesanalyst wrote on March 5, 2007 3:59 PM:

I think the former Attorneys are giving some broad hints here.

1. "The prosecution of individual cases must be based on justice, fairness, and compassion - not political ideology or partisan politics. We believed that the public we served and protected deserved nothing less."

Is this in reference to only Domenici and Wilson? Are there other stories like the NM interference attempt? Suggested question - "Would you like to tell the committee about other instances of political interference you've experienced during your tenure as US Atty?"

2. "When we had new ideas or differing opinions, we assumed that such thoughts would always be welcomed by the Department and could be freely and openly debated within the halls of that great institution."

Assumed? Suggested question - "What made you feel the DOJ no longer respected or appreciated your opinions?"

And I like my Security Code below- Hope

harpodog wrote on March 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

Amazing. A huge thank you to Josh and his colleagues here for helping draw back the curtain on these "resignations", and the corruption behind them.

mbbsdphil wrote on March 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

These are experienced, bright, tough, and savvy lawyers. The administration has foolishly created a conflict between their careers and playing ball. But they are still ambitious lifelong Republicans.

They may cooperate. But they ask questions and parse answers for a living. They will make Democratic Congressional know their facts and do their jobs. This will not be a cake walk.

numbertwopencil wrote on March 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

I count six signers. What happened to the other two? (Is that right? Eight total?)

Also, if the Cunningham investigation is the heart of this matter, what chance is there that Lam can talk about it and/or the committee can ask questions about it? Isn't it--in the reality based sense of the word--an ongoing investigation?

Arkansan wrote on March 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

Damn. That letter says quite a bit, more than expected. What it doesn’t say is even more damning, not a whisper of support for Gonzales or Bush.

Erik Jensen wrote on March 5, 2007 4:13 PM:

Why is it that most of these attorneys that were fired and spoke out from western states? That seems to be an agle that could explain the intent of this government. GWB is a cloned idiot! Was he an SAE?

mbbsdphil wrote on March 5, 2007 4:19 PM:

Kevin Ryan is the USA in San Francisco; he may well have been fired as the token incompetent. See, the San Francisco Weekly on the web for background. (Thanks to another blogger.) That would have allowed McNutty (sp) to Jesuitically say that that USAs had been fired for performance reasons.

Can't recall the eighth fired USA. I just keep remembering that Karl never does something only for one or the stated reason.

Englischlehrer wrote on March 5, 2007 4:47 PM:

first post on this website after lurking for about a month or so. I keep waiting for some big scandal to erupt in the administration's face but there keeps being interference with britney's hair and anne nicole's baby to think abou war profiteering or illegal wiretapping and not one of the has the chutzpah to call for impeachment on his/her own grounds. Sack up, as we say where I'm from, this is your chance to be great, to say something and act in a certain way that will inadvertantly make you credible with the new direction the country could go. I become more patriotic everyday, now having lived in Germany the past 4 years but I can't believe that the major players in the Bush Administration have committed numerous felonies, breaking serious laws but the interference and the Department of Justice paper blitz or lack thereof with large, invisible line in the sand that everyone seems to be afraid of crossing and that's what is keeping the government together.

Am I totally out of line for suggesting that the government should be, in a sense, overthrown. What happened to how the government was intended and we let it get so slutty it's like have a prostitute living in your home. The hypocrisy of the people who question my supporting the troops or my patriotism is such an affront to doing something positive.

In class today, I played Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, and how no one today speaks in a way that can bring so many different people together. It's like a Bono but even still he gets swallowed up in the immensity of it all and yet here I am, basically living a simple very pleasurable life travelling a lot and the worst atrocities are being perpetrated by people from the United States, or that their superiors already knew that, or their superiors who dificulty agreed with some assessment the president continuously browbeat, with the underlings hitting the Sunday talkcircuit sounding like mutant talking dollars, all with a similar message but said in each person's attempt to connect with a mass of people who are, as HL Mencken put it, "who are vaguely afraid that someone somewhere is having fun."

Anyway...www.jasonconga.blogspot.com

What?! wrote on March 5, 2007 4:52 PM:

Just contacted the subcommittee (and Chairwoman Sanchez office) regarding Bogden and a question we have in Nevada deals with the followinig issue:

As has been reported, the Nevada USA office along with the FBI raided ex-congressman (now Nevada Governor), Jim Gibbons contributor/friend/"little brother" Warren Trepp's ex-business partner, Dennis Montgomery, home. A judge has reportedly ruled this highly unconstitutional.

Who ordered the raid Mr. Bogden?

Rich P wrote on March 5, 2007 4:58 PM:

While true these USAs serve under the Prez's approval AFTER Senate confirmation, the issue is that they will be replaced through a provision (loophole? mistake?) in the Patriot Act which allows appointment of new USAs without Senate confirmation. So the bigger potential scandal is actually who the intended replacements are.

klyde wrote on March 5, 2007 4:58 PM:

AR, AZ--what's the difference? Besides, Arizona starts with "Ar" too. Why should Arkansas get "AR"?

They wrestled for it and Arkansas won.

swamp thing wrote on March 5, 2007 5:12 PM:

Wasn't it that schmuck Arlen Specter who inserted the provision into the Patriot Act that allows for the dismissal of these attorneys?

Uh Clem wrote on March 5, 2007 5:24 PM:

If any lawyers are reading, I would really like to know the answer or even speculation based on this question: notwithstanding that these U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, if it could be proven by documents or testimony that any of these firings were undertaken with the deliberate intention of sabotaging or impeding an ongoing investigation, would that constitute obstruction of justice?

Crust wrote on March 5, 2007 5:30 PM:

swamp thing asks:

"Wasn't it that schmuck Arlen Specter who inserted the provision into the Patriot Act that allows for the dismissal of these attorneys?"

That's correct (or more precisely one of his staffers; he claims not to have known about it).

Dennis wrote on March 5, 2007 5:36 PM:

Specter can claim all he wants about not knowing the provision was inserted into the so-called, Patriot Act(s). But I don't recall anyone in Specter's office head being rolled for it.

Nor do I recall Specter taking the lead to remove it either.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Palli Davis Holubar wrote on March 5, 2007 6:05 PM:

A Sen. Spector staffer answered the phone in the DC office when I called a few weeks ago. Anticipating my comment. he abruptly said the following: "Anyone who cared to read the bill before voting could have seen the insert clause." I had called because the irony of Specter explaining on the floor (during the Iraq cloture silliness)mugging to C-span camera: (paraphrase) " I understand that the American public doesn't understand the arcane rules of this august body, My staff doesn't even understand them." But they knew how to insert this clause into the usa patriot reauthorization without his knowing?

Charles wrote on March 5, 2007 6:27 PM:

"Wasn't it that schmuck Arlen Specter who inserted the provision into the Patriot Act that allows for the dismissal of these attorneys?"

No, the ability to dismiss the attorneys for no reason always existed - pleasure of the President. What was inserted (by Specter, his aide, or his dog) was the ability to appoint "temporary" replacements that can stay in office until a permanent replacement is confirmed by the Senate. The previous requirement was that a temporary replacement could only last (from memory here) 120 days.

This little dog and pony show is just a bit of political showmanship. There was nothing illegal about asking for the USAs to resign. Unless, as Uh Clem asks (I've seen this in every story on this subject, but no answer): If it impedes an ongoing investigation, is it illegal? IANAL, but I rather doubt it is. It'd show more balls just to push through the legislation to undo it, but then the Democrats couldn't beat up the Republicans on the political talk shows and the Senate floor over it.
Yes, I know, they tried it. But there's so many sneaky, underhanded ways of passing a law, this was "slipped in" and no one noticed, funny how the undo is so easily blocked.

Michael wrote on March 5, 2007 6:35 PM:

It isn't illegal to fire attorneys. It is, however, illegal to lie to Congress.

FormerAUSA wrote on March 5, 2007 8:54 PM:

Mike Battle was set to leave the Executive Office for U.S. Atorneys long before this brouhaha started, so there's nothing in the tea leaves to be read there.

Bob Johnson wrote on March 5, 2007 10:00 PM:

Go to Slate.com and read Dahlia Lithwick's 2-3 columns on this scandal for complete coverage and speculation.

Hector wrote on March 5, 2007 10:41 PM:

Uh Clem writes, "If any lawyers are reading, I would really like to know the answer or even speculation based on this question: notwithstanding that these U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, if it could be proven by documents or testimony that any of these firings were undertaken with the deliberate intention of sabotaging or impeding an ongoing investigation, would that constitute obstruction of justice?"

In a case heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit a black residential tenant sued her landlord alleging that the landlord had refused to renew the tenant's lease solely because the tenant was black. The landlord's defense was that he was not obliged to renew anyone's lease, so his motive in refusing to renew the plaintiff's lease was irrelevant and his action could not be deemed a violation of any statutory or constitutional right enjoyed by the plaintiff. The Court of Appeals disagreed. In his opinion for the Court, Judge Spotswood Robinson wrote, "A landlord can refuse to renew a lease for any reason or for no reason, but he cannot refuse to renew it for this reason." There is at the very least a very strong argument that the same principal applies to the firing of USA's -- they can be fired for any reason or for no reason, but they cannot be fired for this reason.

Robin Boerner wrote on March 6, 2007 12:39 AM:

Why is it that most of these attorneys that were fired and spoke out from western states? That seems to be an agle that could explain the intent of this government. GWB is a cloned idiot! Was he an SAE?

Posted by: Erik Jensen
Date: March 5, 2007 04:13 PM

Read below:

The best part of this it is all archived here at TPM. Thank you! It would be interesting to go through the comments made by all and put them in some sort of order. Any volunteers? A senator may love you for it!

There was some speculation that Bush had a master plan of replacing the USA's in the 9th circuit, the most liberal, with his boys. Then after a respectable amount of time they would become judges. Right wing judges.

Too far fetched? Timothy Burgess in Alaska is now a new judge. His replacement was Deborah Smith (she became a magistrate or such). Her replacement was one Patriot Act USA Nelson Cohen.

United States Attorney’s Office
District of Alaska
222 West 7th Avenue, #9
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7567

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Deborah M. Smith

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

First Assistant U.S. Attorney
907-271-5071 / Fax: 271-2345

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCES APPOINTMENT OF NELSON COHEN
AS UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Justice Department today announced the appointment of Nelson Cohen to serve as the United States Attorney for the District of Alaska.

Mr. Cohen will serve under an Attorney General Appointment(insert Patriot Act here). He succeeds First Assistant United States Attorney

Deborah Smith,
who has served as Acting United States Attorney under the Vacancy Reform Act

since U.S. District Court Judge Tim Burgess resigned from the position to take a seat on the federal bench in 2005

. Under the Vacancy Reform Act, First Assistant United States Attorneys can only serve for 210 days as Acting United States Attorneys and Ms. Smith's appointment expires on August 22, 2006. Mr. Cohen comes to the District of Alaska with a varied and impressive history of service to the Department of Justice and to the legal community. Since 1987, Mr. Cohen has been an Assistant UnitedStates Attorney in the Western District of Pennsylvania, where he presently serves as the Deputy Criminal Division Chief overseeing the White Collar Crimes Section. Before joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Pittsburgh, Mr. Cohen practiced law for 10 years inAlaska: first as an Assistant United States Attorney responsible for both criminal and civil cases, with anemphasis on drug prosecutions, medical malpractice defense and appellate practice, and later as a private practitioner in Anchorage. Mr. Cohen started his career as a trial attorney in the Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, District Attorney’s Office, where he prosecuted robbery and homicide cases.In addition to his legal experience, Mr. Cohen has been a presenter at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, the National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association and the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He has also served as a Continuing Legal Education Instructor.Mr. Cohen earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science at the University of Pittsburgh,and his law degree from the Duquesne University School of Law. # # #

This as done because:

Columnist: Prosecutor Purge is to Fatten GOP Resumes
By Paul Kiel - January 19, 2007, 3:37 PM Jane Ann Morison of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, yesterday:

A GOP source said [Sen. John Ensign (R-NV}] was told that the decision to remove U.S. attorneys, primarily in the West, was part of a plan to "give somebody else that experience" to build up the back bench of Republicans by giving them high-profile jobs.Permalink | Comments (22) | TOPICS: U.S. Attorneys

Charles O'Reilly wrote on March 6, 2007 11:57 AM:

1 - the eighth US Attorney asked to resign was Margaret M. Chiara of the Western District of Michigan;
2 - not all of these former United States Attorneys are Republicans - at least one (Carol Lam) is an independent.