« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
And it gets even better.
The Justice Department has long argued that it fired the eight U.S. attorneys because of performance concerns -- a contention that's been so thoroughly discredited that it's a punchline now.
But it appears that we've reached a new level of DoJ ridiculousness.
One of the senior Justice Department officials involved in the firings is Bill Mercer, the U.S. Attorney for Montana who pulls double duty as the principal associate deputy attorney general in Washington, D.C. Well, I say double duty, but he really doesn't seem to spend much time as U.S. attorney: just three days per month, according to congressional testimony.
The chief judge in Mercer's district has been complaining about his absence for years, at one point berating him during a court hearing: "You have no credibility -- none.... Your office is a mess." And that judge did what he could to get Mercer thrown out, even writing to Alberto Gonzales in 2005 that Mercer was violating federal law by not living in the district of which he was supposedly U.S. attorney.
So what did Mercer do? He changed the law. From The Washington Post:
[In November of 2005] Mercer had a GOP Senate staffer insert into a bill a provision that would change the rules so that federal prosecutors could live outside their districts to serve in other jobs, according to documents and interviewsCongress passed the provision several months later as part of the USA Patriot Act reauthorization bill, retroactively benefiting Mercer and a handful of other senior Justice officials who pull double duty as U.S. attorneys and headquarters officials....
...[T]he new legislation was added to the Patriot bill at the request of Mercer, who had been assigned the task of shepherding the provision through Congress, according to congressional aides and new statements from one of Mercer's colleagues.
(TPM reported on this provision last month, but we didn't know Mercer was responsible for it.)
This is, of course, the same Patriot Act that contained the provision that allowed the administration to indefinitely appoint interim U.S. attorneys. So it was full of treats for the administration.
The punchline here, of course, is that the Justice Department officials have straight-facedly claimed that U.S. Attorney for New Mexico David Iglesias was fired because he was absent from the office one month out of the year (for his Navy reserve duty). He was, they claimed, an "absentee landlord." And yet one of the officials responsible for the firings had the law changed so that he could still be the U.S. attorney while being all but completely absent from his district. Funny, huh?
Note: For those of you who are suspicious that Mercer and others are drawing two salaries -- a Justice Department spokesman told The Washington Post that the U.S. attorneys continue to draw their U.S. attorney salary and are not paid extra for the executive positions.
Update: A TPM Reader jumps in on the salary question:
Of course they're not getting two salaries -- they're each working a single full-time job, just with a wide array of distinct responsibilities that regularly require travel. The question is whether they're getting their housing and other expenses subsidized. DOJ has two different set-ups for employees on "detail" from one position to another: some have their housing, etc., paid for in the secondary location on the condition that they continue to maintain a primary residence ( i.e., they pay for a house/apartment as usual in their home city, and the government pays for housing in Washington, along with a generous per diem allowance for food that assumes the person is eating every meal in a restaurant); others don't get that treatment, on the assumption that they spend such a large majority of time in one city or the other that they don't need to maintain two residences. The first is a much sweeter deal, for obvious reasons -- it would be interesting to know which kind Mercer and the others are getting. Saying that they're not getting double salary may be a dodge to hide the fact that their total compensation is in fact much higher than it would be if they were staying at home and attending to their duties as US Attorneys on a full-time basis.
Comments (122)
little d wrote on May 2, 2007 9:21 AM:So funny I forgot to laugh.
Englischlehrer wrote on May 2, 2007 9:23 AM:It's okay if that isn't illegal but isn't that enough to find yourself out a job?
To fire Iglesias for that reason and then have another USA getting promotions while neglecting his district...
jak1 wrote on May 2, 2007 9:24 AM:I'm soo surpirsed!
Bill P wrote on May 2, 2007 9:29 AM:The situation is obvious; the only thing remaining is what can/will we do about it? Normal scandal and embarrassment has no effect on these people. Bush can fire Generals until he finds one that says what he wants, and then Bush claims he is following the General's advice. This with a straight face.
It gets worse: Abu Graib, Gitmo, Habeas Corpus, billions lost, Katrina, total politicization of the entire executive branch.
So what will we do about it? Just wait??
BP
flailey wrote on May 2, 2007 9:29 AM:I've heard the term "calvinball" thrown around a few times but I can't think of a more appropriate application than this. The classic example of a game where the object is to change the rules in the middle anytime you start to think you're losing.
TheraP wrote on May 2, 2007 9:30 AM:Sick at heart here.
The whole thing is like swiss cheese. Except the holes are filled with stinking pus. More and more holes. Pretty soon, there will be nothing but holes.
The magnitude of the turpitude is beyond bearing.
Peter Duffy wrote on May 2, 2007 9:31 AM:Delete Gonzo, and make Merce(nary) AG. Clearly he has great future.
T. Barr wrote on May 2, 2007 9:34 AM:The Bushies have taken this government to another level of disgust.
As you said: "Now we find out "[In November of 2005] Mercer had a GOP Senate staffer insert into a bill a provision that would change the rules so that federal prosecutors could live outside their districts to serve in other jobs, according to documents and interviews."
Have we been duped, or what?
T. Barr wrote on May 2, 2007 9:34 AM:The Bushies have taken this government to another level of disgust.
As you said: "Now we find out "[In November of 2005] Mercer had a GOP Senate staffer insert into a bill a provision that would change the rules so that federal prosecutors could live outside their districts to serve in other jobs, according to documents and interviews."
Have we been duped, or what?
RickinSF wrote on May 2, 2007 9:34 AM:I would like to assume that DOJ assertions that Mercer is not drawing two salaries is being checked out.
Not that DOJ would lie about anything like that, but, well, you know.
code: "great," as in so many of the whoppers we've already heard.
Anonymous wrote on May 2, 2007 9:37 AM:Fine, they are not drawing a salary, but what about civil service Pension Credits for both jobs???
Theoretically, they could inflate their pensions by holding down two or more jobs. The USA in NJ, Chris Christie just busted a senior Legislator for essentially doing just that with a couple of no-show government jobs!!
Isn't the Montana gig a no-show job if it's only three days a month, 36 days a year!
Englischlehrer wrote on May 2, 2007 9:37 AM:How can they reconcile the double standard of firing Iglesias (which could be a violation of law because he is in the reserves) and allow Mercer to have the two jobs? Why can they have two jobs? Aren't they in effect neglecting one of them by definition? Isn't be a US Attorney a full-time position? Or being the principle assistant of the deputy attorney general? Now is he working 80 hours/week?
ViniloSuave wrote on May 2, 2007 9:39 AM:"Corruption never was compulsory."--Robinson Jeffers
Anthony wrote on May 2, 2007 9:40 AM:Answer: George Orwell's Animal Farm!
paul lukasiak wrote on May 2, 2007 9:40 AM:Has Mercer been supoenaed yet?
The number of "Senior Justice Department officials" that could have contributed to Sampson's lists keeps getting smaller and smaller. Given that the position that Mercer was awarded in the JoD (Acting Associate AG)put him in charge of the highly politicized Civil Rights Division, he looks exactly like the kind of "loyal Bushie" who Sampson would consult.
Four people were cited by Sampson...
McNulty--who denied putting anyone on the list
Battle --who denies putting anyone on the list
Margolis -- a career civil servant who was highly unlikely to put competent AGs on the list.
Mercer -- who is cited by Sampson as being critical of both Lam and Iglesias, and is "acting" head of department that oversees the civil rights division.
kentuck wrote on May 2, 2007 9:41 AM:Impeachment is too good for these SOBs...
mayan wrote on May 2, 2007 9:43 AM:I bet the federal judge is gonna be really pleased to find out that DOJ played him for a complete and utter sucker.
paul lukasiak wrote on May 2, 2007 9:44 AM:oh, and I forgot to mention.... as "acting associate AG" and someone who was involved in determining which USAs should be replaced, wasn't it a huge conflict of interest for someone also holding the job of USA for Montana a huge conflict of interest?
randron wrote on May 2, 2007 9:45 AM:Historically, I seem to remember the Warren G. Harding Administration to be somewhat of a laughingstock, but has there EVER been ANY administration in American history as corrupt and incompetent as the "Bushies?" They have surpassed "laughingstock" and taken the U.S. all the way to "virtually irrelevent embarassment." We're not even worthy of "punchline status" anymore. Now, the general feeling in the world for America is a combination of hate and pity. What hath Bush wrought? George has become the "Urkel" of American politics, but his "Did I do that??" excuses are wearing mighty thin! Security code "part" as in, "What part of "sick joke" don't you understand?
shopfrank wrote on May 2, 2007 9:46 AM:Perhaps they are just receiving a single salary, but are they getting living expenses, per diem for travel and other perks that makes their income much greater?
Johnsnottoodistracted wrote on May 2, 2007 9:48 AM:Wow,great.Haven't heard Calvin Ball for a long time.I used to say that to my lawyer girlfriend.Speaking of lawyers: has anyone wondered how these highly skilled(?) politically motivated _____________ actually make a living? Do they do anything but jeeeeeeeeeez,what do they do?
ian wrote on May 2, 2007 9:50 AM:How do you rate performance when this type work is what they do?
Never mind.I got it.
how come all these guys look like Karl Rove? Sampson, this joker... I've heard of hiring in your own image, but this is just too odd and creepy.
barrelhse wrote on May 2, 2007 9:50 AM:The so-called Patriot Act was suspect from day one. Time to repeal.
skogie wrote on May 2, 2007 9:50 AM:Ok, so they say he does not get paid two salaries. So is he paying for his travel back and forth and living expenses in DC. Or is he getting some kind of reimbursement or stipend?
JoeB wrote on May 2, 2007 9:51 AM:Anyone else wondering what else was tucked into the Patriot Act reauthoization that is yet to be revealed.
And, incidentally, was it the same GOP Senate staffer from Specter's office that did the dirty work in this case?
Did any of the Democrats who voted "yea" on this bill bother to read it?
bajsa wrote on May 2, 2007 9:52 AM:These people are just sad.
Stephen Johnson wrote on May 2, 2007 9:52 AM:I think this story and the whole situation is rich with intrique and lies. I love telling my wife about it. Her response is, but is any ov it illegal and can that actually prove it in court? She is no conservative but as always, she has a point. If these are not illegal acts then what is the whole point? We already know the whole systme is wrotten with Rove's politics.
Jim wrote on May 2, 2007 9:53 AM:If they are falsely inditing people on trumpted up charges or blocking prosecutions of republicans then make the case and get them removed. I think much of the information up to this point is helpful in uncovering what did actually go on. That said, lets get to the part where people are going to jail. The questions need to change.
Has anyone compiled a list of the provisions added to the "Patriot" Act by staffers after conference?
Seitz wrote on May 2, 2007 9:55 AM:Can someone shed some light on the "had a senior staffer insert a provision into a bill" thing? This is something that has bothered me from the get go.
Do staffers have the authority to simply insert provisions into bills? Do they do this, at least occasionally, without the knowledge of the Senator for whom they work? Is not embarrassing for these Senators to pass bills which strip from laws provisions that they didn't know existed when those laws were originally voted upon? And why hasn't Specter been grilled about the provision that started this controversy in the first place?
How exactly does this work?
JEP wrote on May 2, 2007 9:56 AM:"the same Patriot Act that contained the provision that allowed the administration to_____"
Just fill in the blank, this "Patriot Act" (how Orwellian!) has become a very versatile vehicle for Neocon-Republican partisan subterfuge...
Uncle Montana wrote on May 2, 2007 9:59 AM:
RandyR wrote on May 2, 2007 10:02 AM:Does anybody know how to reach Judge Donald W. Molloy? I'm in Montana and would like to see that he becomes aware of this little tidbit.
How many more suprises from the Patriot Act? Maybe it's time to repeal the Act and then make each of the provisions pass on their own merits. It seems that no one read the damn thing.
In the last week I heard Dick Durbin twice touting the "Iraqi OIl Law". It's real name is the Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law and I'm sure he hasn't read it because its been secret. It's secret because it assigns about 75% of Iraqi oil to foreign oil compamies. So who cares if they haven't read it (like the Patriot Act) pass it anyway.
It looks like the president wants this passed to the extent that they will switch from al Malaki to a "post-Saddam Baathist regime" to get it.
Security Code: expert Maybe they would be one if they read the bills.
Patience wrote on May 2, 2007 10:02 AM:As RickinSF and others have pointed out, it doesn't make sense to believe anything a DOJ spokesperson tells you about Mercer's salary until you check it out. For example, did Mercer get an extra large "performance bonus" (as some other loyal Bushies in the department did) for his double duty? Was he offered a housing allowance? Has he claimed expenses for "moving" to Montana on his expense reports?
Englischlehrer wrote on May 2, 2007 10:21 AM:Where is the link/proof that Specter's staffer added that USA provision?
Mary wrote on May 2, 2007 10:24 AM:I'm reminded of George W. Bush in 2000 sanctimoniously proclaiming his promise to "return honor and dignity" to the White House, and it literally sickens me. What a pretentious little smirky adolescent pr*ck. And I'm a Republican. NEVER AGAIN.
Spencer's Mom wrote on May 2, 2007 10:29 AM:Call me dense, but I don't get it. If you are breaking the law, then "change" the law RETROACTIVELY to allow the action that caused you to break the law in the first place, didn't you still break the law before the change was made?
So if it is determined that Rove's violation of the Hatch Act is against the law now, can he get the law changed retractively? And what a can of worms that kind of logic opens!
Wormwood wrote on May 2, 2007 10:32 AM:Re: TheraP @ 9:30
Out of your anguish comes such eloquence. "The magnitude of the turpitude" should stand as the epitaph of these sad and sorry times.
liz wrote on May 2, 2007 10:34 AM:The Patriot Act appears to be an act of treason from where I sit. Subverting laws is what the act is all about. Someone with authority should immediately repeal this piece of garbage.
nathaniel wrote on May 2, 2007 10:34 AM:I just wonder how these people look in the mirror and respect themselves?
Have they no shame? Or sense of integrity?
Who says, "I wanna grow up to be a partisan hack, and abuse the American Justice System to further the interests of my political party."
up is down and down is up
skogie wrote on May 2, 2007 10:35 AM:Kind of a side note question. Has any one looked at the DOJ budget over the last several years? Any Links?
william wrote on May 2, 2007 10:37 AM:Whoa It never stops! We need better laws now, imeadiatly. I wonder where he got this bold idea that he could slip, or rewrite a bill and then collect more money.
Is this guy gone? I mean hasn't he broke some law rewriting laws? Is there laws against this or what.
Hey, many thanks to MUCKRAKER for staying on all of this.You have my support.
Wm
phil james wrote on May 2, 2007 10:39 AM:Another as yet obscure provision of the Patriot Act, inserted at the same time as the other two provisions noted here, makes it a requirement for the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war to assertively sanction elections at the National level. This provision is expected to be invoked sometime in October of 2008, to wit, the CiC stipulates that elections at the National level are not assertively sanctioned but rather suspended temporarily until the war situation stabilizes. Likely no timetable will be set for stabilization and no criteria defined for what would constitute a stable war situation nor exactly what war is at issue.
C Berry wrote on May 2, 2007 10:39 AM:The Republican party used to stand for something. Many of us still disagreed with what that party stood for, but at least it was an honorable disagreement; we, in turn, could understand the intellectual basis for their disagreement with our position.
But now that party stands for NOTHING but ineptitude, scandal, and corruption. It veils itself in patriotism, but the more reporters uncover the truth, the more the Patriot Act becomes nothing but a Corruption Pact. Their gall is stomach churning.
bordersmuggler wrote on May 2, 2007 10:40 AM:@May 2, 2007 09:52 AM
"is any of it illegal and can that actually prove it in court?"
Besides being retrospective, Congress needs also to be prospective and passing legistlation to prevent such politicization of the Justice Department in the future.
jon wrote on May 2, 2007 10:42 AM:Joe B has a good point - what other goodies made it into the Patriot Act reauthorization? If legislators (and their staff) actually read the act, they either did not understand or care.
The article suggests another line of inquiry:
If the Montana USA's office is a mess, that means that a number of investigations are moving slowly, not being done well, or not happening at all. Could this be an intended outcome? Who might benefit in that district from a sloppy, slow and biased application of the law?
And what has this prize USA been doing at Main Justice that is so important he alone must be detailed to it?
Unfortunately, the administration's behavior means that the work of all of the USA's becomes suspect to one degree or another. The more people look, the more turns up. It doesn't seem as if these investigations hit too many dead ends, they just branch out into richer seams.
bobh wrote on May 2, 2007 10:44 AM:So...EVERY time any Republican testified that Iglesias was an absenteed landlord and that was why he was fired they PURGERED themselves?
Great.
Sounds good to me now. Start penetrating them.
C. Stephen White wrote on May 2, 2007 10:46 AM:Great Reporting again!
The Stench of Self-Service (almost) overwhelms the putrid Reek of Ignorant Ideological Idiocy.
klyde wrote on May 2, 2007 10:46 AM:they couldn't have modified the (un)PATRIOT(ic) Act as they did without the undercover complicity of that slimy piece of crap arlen spector. I wish someone would dig into his role!
Kiefer Sutherland wrote on May 2, 2007 10:47 AM:And thanks for the endorsement philly enquirer.
He looks kind of like me.
Austin Cooper wrote on May 2, 2007 10:47 AM:(Snark / Parody Alert)
Dear America,
In order to put any concerns you have to rest, I wanted to make a few brief comments to clarify matters.
Allegations have been made that in November of 2005, I directed that a provision be inserted into the later-renewed "USA Patriot Act" whiched altered rules involving residency of Federal prosecutors. The provision changed existing law and allowed U.S. Attorneys to serve in other Federal positions outside the Districts in which they had been assigned.
The allegation states that I directed this change because it would benefit me, personally. I had been in violation of law, by acting in the position for which I'd been hired, U.S. Attorney for Montana (which I effectively ignored) *and* my real job, a position at Main Justice in Washington -- where I could be of more service to the Party and the president in our great work.
I'm writing today to tell you this is absolutely true and correct.
The United States is a land where a man *should* sieze as much wealth and power as possible, by any means at his disposal. There are those to whom god shows favor -- and our lord respects strength and risk-taking; history is full of strong winners whom the lord favored, and weak losers who were hellbound anyway.
In our country, he rewards the winners with high office and material wealth. Losers have small lives, breathe bad air, eat tainted food, pay back predatory loans and pay the penalties under the law for their sin of being losers.
The few malcontents are written and talked about badly in our press. We have radio talk-celebrities and online pundits for the losers with a voice -- and there are always orange jumpsuits for Christmas! (Sorry, that's an in-house joke at Justice.)
Laws are made to be changed when the effect benefits the chosen and strong, or the Party and the president. Power creates more power; it's all part of returning our nation to greatness.
I did it because I'm a winner, and god will smile on me for it. That change in a stupid and unnecessary law allows me to focus on the real task of rebuilding our country -- for the winners to come.
Because I dream of a nation where your children might have the the opportunity to serve my children. And, by being smart and strong, with god's help -- that day will come.
Sincerely,
ohiomeister wrote on May 2, 2007 10:47 AM:Bill Mercer
I hope Congress acts quickly to reverse this law. U.S. Attorneys definitely need to live in their districts.
If Mercer would rather live in D.C. than Montana, that's fine, but he shouldn't be the U.S. Attorney for Montana then.
wrc wrote on May 2, 2007 10:47 AM:Flagrant, repeated instances of the hypocritical exercise of political power plus endlessly repeating "I don't recall, Senator," should be a felony.
Dennis wrote on May 2, 2007 10:48 AM:"This is, of course, the same Patriot Act that contained the provision that allowed the administration to indefinitely appoint interim U.S. attorneys."
Could someone tell me what happened to the "alleged" person in Sen. Arlen Specter's office who "slipped" this little provision into the Patriot Act?
wrc wrote on May 2, 2007 10:48 AM:Flagrant, repeated instances of the hypocritical exercise of political power plus endlessly repeating "I don't recall, Senator," should be a felony.
ROTTEN wrote on May 2, 2007 10:52 AM:The Bush Admin is NOT incompetent. They are a group of people who FEEL ENTITLED. They feel they deserve special treatment because they are true Americans and patriots.
Get it right, people. believe it was Sampson who asked incredulously to a question in his hearing, does that apply to Republicans. They want to punish the rest of us with the full force of the law; YET want to get off with I apologize when they are confronted with their law-breaking, misdeeds and misgivings. They want a 2-tier system.
They must be held accountable.
ebmck wrote on May 2, 2007 10:52 AM:I want to know why there is no loud, credible demand from within Congress for some serious investigation. Considering the fact that the Justice Department is where the problems reside, the FBI isn't the answer anymore. Why is there no Independent Counsel? Clinton had at least 4 during his 8-year tenure -- olive branches to a Republican-controlled Congress. Don't the Democrats control Congress now? Isn't it time for someone independent to get involved in this investigation?
Steve5117 wrote on May 2, 2007 10:56 AM:Uncle Montana:
Chief Judge Donald Molloy (406) 542-7286
ROTTEN wrote on May 2, 2007 10:57 AM:Arlen Specter is own a slippery slope. He is all to aware that the Dems have the goods on him. I hated his posturing and puffing on tv against Bush's policy only to fall inline during vote time.
He was duplicitous and many knew. With this patriot act provision, he knows he is caught. He can't protest Dems too much right now lest his aide will be at a hearing of his own.
marblex wrote on May 2, 2007 10:58 AM:WHAT we can do about it:
1. PASS LEGISLATION limiting recovery by federal employees who believe they have been "wrongfully" discharged for whatever reason, say 5k a head
2. FIRE THE WHOLE FUCKING LOT OF EM
3. Re-hire competent, lifetime, career employees who left out of disgust because of the creeping cronyism of the Bushinistas.
4. Appoint REAL lawyers not these matchbook hacks.
It will take a while, but it MUST happen.
Otherwise, our government will remain full of extremists who hate the constitution and want to turn this country into a theocracy run by their own little Jack Boots.
CLEAN SWEEP 2008
mayan wrote on May 2, 2007 11:04 AM:Warren G. Harding, US Grant, etc. was just corruption and oligarchic frolics.
This is very, VERY different. This is a concerted effort...a planned conspiracy that operates from the top down. A whole new (and very scary) can of worms.
Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 2, 2007 11:06 AM:I have typed this so farging many times my fingers know the phrase in thier sleep . . .
"Repeal the Patriots Act!"
Rich wrote on May 2, 2007 11:08 AM:Who are these staffers sticking items into legislation?
cevrero wrote on May 2, 2007 11:09 AM:Is there any evidence that he played a role of damage control for Conrad Burns? Possibly by delaying investigations and so forth...
pluky wrote on May 2, 2007 11:17 AM:US Attorney of Montana, but really working in DC? How is this different from favorite courtiers being granted, by crown or pope, marquisates, bishoprics and abbeys so that they have no intention of ever administering, much less visiting, so that the income therefrom frees them for the real work at hand -- court politics.
bobh wrote on May 2, 2007 11:18 AM:Okay. Isn't it worth out time to go over the Patriot act witha fine toothed comb now?
What nasty tidbits can we find as yet unknown and link to the conspiracy of lies that is the RNC takeover of the US Gov?
Dig in:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.r.03162:
mayan wrote on May 2, 2007 11:19 AM:BTW...there are two excellent diaries/posts up on Kos and firedoglake.
The Kos piece, by drational, is the result of databasing and analyzing e-mails (dumped and withheld). This is only the latest diary discussing the project that drational and the other volunteers have taken on...
And on firedoglake, emptywheel gives a chronology and analysis of events leading up to Comey's resignation and how it fits into the conspiracy to steal DOJ at large.
Great companion pieces for the work and writing here.
Phill wrote on May 2, 2007 11:20 AM:The more significant issue surel is that as Washington DC federal prosecutor, Mercer is the individual who would have to bring any prosecutions for contempt of Congress.
So the pretty obvious motive for this arrangement is to make sure that they have a 'good Bushie' in the position.
bobh wrote on May 2, 2007 11:21 AM:Are you fucking kidding me?
SEC. 1011. CRIMES AGAINST CHARITABLE AMERICANS.
Guess which bill this little provision is in?
Whoah. Can't have anyone misrepresent themselves to a granny now can we?
TexasEllen wrote on May 2, 2007 11:21 AM:I believe Specter's aide who did the slipping is now the USAttorney in Utah, because Orrin Hatch wanted him more than Sampson who had wanted the position.
Specter AND Hatch have a lot to answer for. Might be a good idea to do a TPM study of the last version of the "Patriot Act" so that we might advise our congresscritters of what they may want to repeal.
Code word, after: As in, After the DOJ has been examined, there could be as many cases brought within the DOJ as by the DOJ.
Vulture Breath wrote on May 2, 2007 11:23 AM:Interesting contrast.....
Patrick Fitzgerald managed to pull off being a U.S. Attorney in Chicago and Special Counsel at the same time. Granted, he was spending more than 3 days a month in Chicago. Also, his Chicago office is apparently well-managed (by him and others), and runs like a tight machine in his absence. I'm assuming no Chicago judges complained about Fitzgerald being absent.
Agjobs wrote on May 2, 2007 11:23 AM:Wow this brings up all kinds of questions. The first being Conrard Burns and Jack Abramhoff. I would love to hear what Senator Tester has to say about this. Also when I was a kid and they use to teach the constitution in school ( ah yes the good ole days ) I remember a little thing called Ex Post Facto. There are people in prison today that broke laws that have since been repealled. Perhaps a lawyer here could fill us in on that.
I have done some government contract work in the past and I do know that per diems and expenses can be very lucrative if you know how to work the system. In this case calling Montana home and getting expenses in DC would be awesome. DC is a high cost of living area and the $ are compensated accordingly.
Vulture Breath wrote on May 2, 2007 11:24 AM:Phill - not Mercer, but Jeffrey Taylor is the D.C. USA. He's the one who would bring contempt of Congress prosecutions. But yes, Taylor is a loyal Bushie.
William N Smith wrote on May 2, 2007 11:29 AM:This is absolutely unbelieveable.
I cannot believe my eyes.
Why..oh WHY...doesn't Congress get involved in this mess?
William N Smith wrote on May 2, 2007 11:30 AM:This is absolutely unbelieveable.
I cannot believe my eyes.
Why..oh WHY...doesn't Congress get involved in this mess?
Books Alive wrote on May 2, 2007 11:32 AM:While surfing my regular blogs (all Dem) yesterday, I was directed to one "across the aisle" that called for Gonzales' impeachment. Sorry that I didn't bookmark it; must have been so stunned to read such a logical idea, coming from a right-wing source. What was important is that there are others besides us who feel his departure is required.
gchaucer2 wrote on May 2, 2007 11:33 AM:@phil james 10:39 a.m.
Yikes! It the provision you cite re: the president sanctioning elections is true, that may be the most serious violation of the Constitution thus far. While the Fifteenth Amendment has long been used for supporting minority voting rights, it clearly can be used to demonstrate that the presidential sanctioning of elections language is clearly unconstitutional.
"The right of citizens of the United Sates to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
We all have a race and color. I suspect that this PA provision warrants closer scrutiny and elimination asap.
Ha! code word: adjust -- I don't think so.
kellion wrote on May 2, 2007 11:33 AM:I believe the Arlen Specter aide who slipped the offending provisions about the interim U.S. attorneys and residency requirements is Brett L. Tolman, who is now U.S. Attorney for Utah. Hmmm. Worth another muckraking.
kellion wrote on May 2, 2007 11:36 AM:It looks like 36-year-old Tolman was confirmed by the same voice vote as Paulose. Another hmmm.
Read profile:
kellion wrote on May 2, 2007 11:36 AM:http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,640196822,00.html
It looks like 36-year-old Tolman was confirmed by the same voice vote as Paulose. Another hmmm.
Read profile:
db wrote on May 2, 2007 11:39 AM:http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,640196822,00.html
Oh, my! Maybe someone should tell the president!
tgr wrote on May 2, 2007 11:40 AM:The infrastructure of our Government is being cynically and gleefully strip-mined for partisan political graft.
The apparent lack of outrage, I suspect, is the denigration of Civics education -- either that, or the majority of the American people are too busy flailing wildly to keep the wolf from the door (just where the Neo-Cons always wanted us), and can't afford the time to pay attention.
This stuff's beyond belief. Once the Rubicon's been crossed, there's little hope of putting Humpty-Dumpty together again.
fivefeethignrisin wrote on May 2, 2007 11:42 AM:So let me see if I've got their strategy here:
Constantly claim that all actual decisions that would cost upper management their jobs (and possible jail time) were delegated to lower level employees who had no qualifications to make these decisions. When proof comes down the pipe that this was actually what happened, upper management admits that yeah, that was a bad decision, but hey, it's nothing you can prosecute me for. Oh, and by the way, as a result, I never knew about nor signed off on all these bad decisions.
Am I getting this right?
Karen wrote on May 2, 2007 11:48 AM:The WaPo article says Mercer got a GOP staffer to insert the change... is the same GOP staffer (Brett Tolman) or another one? And, if it is another one, which senator does he work for?
Isn't Mercer up for senate confirmation? What are Senators Tester and Baucus saying?
Mooser wrote on May 2, 2007 11:51 AM:George has become the "Urkel" of American politics, but his...
Watch it, pal! I don't take invidious comparisons which demean Urkel lightly.
PatD wrote on May 2, 2007 11:52 AM:I have to wonder if the Democratic caucus devote any staff time to analyzing the Patriot Act before voting on it ? I recall a lot of hurry up votes but I still wonder how much effort was spent looking at what was going into this particular batch of sausage.
mbbsdphile wrote on May 2, 2007 11:52 AM:Mr. Mercer's (and others?) probable "all expenses paid trip to Washington" is reprehensible and should be the subject of a tort claims action.
The management choice to have people such as Mercer "do bouble duty" is a fraud on taxpayers. Executives aren't doing double duty, they barely have time for one of these jobs. The arrangement is far more lucrative than extra salary because it is after tax "reimbrusement", which picks up the tab in what is now one of America's most expensive cities.
Other than avoiding a confirmation hearing in the Senate, it is hard to fathom why the administration would want to hobble the DOJ by not fully staffing it when. Apart from all the Regen U grads they want, they could still hire from any law school or law firm in the country.
The conclusion is that their objective is to hobble the DOJ, except when it pursues the administration's political enemies.
Imagine the collective dysfunction in the DOJ that another administration will have to fix, even if it started tomorrow. Now imagine how much work there is if this is how Mr. Bush has managed the entire federal bureaucracy.
MRO wrote on May 2, 2007 11:53 AM:Perhaps a rewarding line of inquiry...
Where does Mercer vote?
Does he own a house in DC?
Rove and Heather Wilson both had voting address/homes in their respective states, but
bohdi wrote on May 2, 2007 12:03 PM:were claiming homestead exemptions for their houses in DC..Said exemption can only be applied on the primary residence.
The newspapers reported that Rove had been caught at this.
One of TMP readers brilliantly provided a key to find Wilson's DC address, and gave the Fraud hotline # .
I just wonder if others were doing the same....
anyone have the time/tools to find more on Mercer's real residency? Is he claiming illegal tax breaks?
Young boy Mercer looks like a cross in some animal husbandry lab between a beaver and a pig. Probably a rabid Christian zealot with a serious history of sexual deviance. People should get all over his background and find out more about him per se since he in reality did nothing illegal that I can see.
A listless and illiterate American public is getting what it both deserves and desires. Its own full- on victimization. Who better to fulfill the fantasy than teams of hundreds of well organized and fanatical Rove drones? Ratfriggers all of them in the grand tradition of Donny Segretti. Once again the mark of the world's most skilled fatman emblazons itself across the idiot mask of Amerikana. Until I see differently, no one comes close to laying a glove on this guy. His central tenet, the one that slow footed investigators and huffy old legislators still do not understand? When playing the game, move the goalposts whenever you chose and often merely for your own amusement.
mbbsdphile wrote on May 2, 2007 12:06 PM:Hypocrisy, thy name is George Bush.
Authoritarians easily dismiss hypocrisy because adoration of a commanding [sic] leader is the antidote to their fears. For Mr. Bush, it is the antidote to consequences for his incompetence. An incompetence and purposeful maladministration that Mr. Bush has shared with the GSA, FCC, Consumer Products Safety Commission, Interior, DHS, EPA, ad nauseum. Norquist's whet dream come true.
If Mr. Bush were made chief executive of Google, it would be bankrupt within a month and he would have lost all their data.
slowthought wrote on May 2, 2007 12:10 PM:I would be very surprised if lobbying for a measure that benefits you personally (and without disclosure) doesn't violate both DOJ rules and professional ethics of the bar. But either requires someone in the legal profession to pursue and pin down.
stephen wrote on May 2, 2007 12:11 PM:Why do all of these guys have that pudgy soft in the middle look about them? Sort of like ahh ya know they look sort of like...ahhhh Oh I know I know Kal Rove!
stephen wrote on May 2, 2007 12:11 PM:Why do all of these guys have that pudgy soft in the middle look about them? Sort of like ahh ya know they look sort of like...ahhhh Oh I know I know Karl Rove!
margaret wrote on May 2, 2007 12:12 PM:Practically everybody in the 109th and current Congress voted for the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act, and are responsible for everything in it. To plead that they didn't read is is disingenuous.
This Act has already rendered most of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights moot. Read the Act, and try to comprehend it, if you can. It refers to laws not quoted in the Act, but referenced only by numbers, changing things such as "and", "the", "but" and other inexplicable renderings of language and meaning.
The Act had a chance to die or be changed, radically, in 2005 because of public outrage, but was delayed over Christmas, and was voted on after the public lost interest, which the Congress, cynically knew would happen.
Citizens are complicit in keeping this Act in place because they do not work hard enough and pay attention over a long term, following the progress of laws through the system. Place ressure on your Congressman, and see what happens. If nothing happens, vote the [insert your favorite expletive here] out!
malcontent wrote on May 2, 2007 12:16 PM:It's time to treat the Bush administration exactly as they should be: as a treasonous cabal of usurpers of power which needs to be smashed.
Take no prisoners, none of them live.
slb wrote on May 2, 2007 12:18 PM:@gchaucer2:
I am quite sure that phil james's post was intended as satire, and that there is actually no such provision in the so-called "Patriot" Act. Nevertheless, there is still a frightening element of truth there, because the administration did indeed float a trial balloon along that line before the last presidential election. Patricial Williams referred to it in a 2004 column in The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040802/williams), pointing out that the administration's trial balloons have a distressing habit of becoming actual policy, however much they dismiss them as merely hypothetical at the first mention:
"But as for the latest balloon: The Administration has floated the "doomsday" possibility of delaying the presidential election if there is a terrorist strike, even as Homeland Security assures us that the question is not if but when. Suspending a federal election would require rewriting our election law, so the Office of Legal Counsel has been pondering, you know, just toying with the idea of whether a nice little piece of "emergency" legislation wouldn't do the trick. Like earlier balloons, this one was followed by quick denials that any such action would ever be necessary."
FMArouet wrote on May 2, 2007 12:19 PM:Phil James:
I was startled by your comment above regarding a Patriot Act provision which "... makes it a requirement for the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war to assertively sanction elections at the National level."
I just tried to scan the text of the the Patriot Act (2006 revised version) for this provision, but I couldn't spot it. Could you point me to the relevant article and clause?
If this provision exists, it would be lay the "legal" foundation for a "state of emergency" edict someday.
randron wrote on May 2, 2007 12:24 PM:TexasEllen...
tekel wrote on May 2, 2007 12:28 PM:Change "congresscritters" to "congressvarmints" and Willard "Mitt," with his lifetime of experience, will rid us of these self-serving sycophants! Code word "collar" as in: Put the collar on these morons and frog-march them off to the pokey!
Malcontent: it's long past time. The punishment for treason is death. If the courts won't sit in judgment, the people must.
Karen wrote on May 2, 2007 12:36 PM:They are able to slip nasty provisions into the Patriot Act because it is long, incomprehensible (change "and" to "or"), and no one is allowed time to read it before voting.
Can't the same be said for all those Supplemental Appropriation bills for the Iraq war? Didn't Sen. Leahy catch something bad [from Spector?] being slipped into an appropriations bill?
Santa Monica Jeremy wrote on May 2, 2007 12:40 PM:And don't forget the most delicious irony of all...
The reason given for some of the USA firings was to open up positions so more loyal Bushies could get that coveted USA experience on their resume. Cummings was one of those, remember?
So they're forcing out some USAs to open up vacancies... at the same time that OTHER USAs are basically no-shows parked on their positions while working elsewhere.
Curiouser and curiouser...
Anonymous wrote on May 2, 2007 12:43 PM:The Tester/Burns election is the obvious to a casual reader reason that Mercer was sitting on the USA slot. The not so obvious reason may have been protecting Burns from the Abramoff scandal.
busboy33 wrote on May 2, 2007 12:43 PM:I wonder, who is the USA for the Wyoming District, and what have they been up to?
@mayan:
"I bet the federal judge is gonna be really pleased to find out that DOJ played him for a complete and utter sucker."
Amen. As an Officer of the Court, you can get away with just about any dirty nonsense you want, as long as you NEVER EVER EVER screw with the God-like creature sitting with a robe on the raised dias in front of you. And a Federal Judge as well, one with enough cajones to write Gonzales and call out his boy. If the Administration doesn't understand what the word "torture" means, I suggest watch this gentleman's future court appearances -- I suspect they will not be pleasant.
@plucky:
thats a brilliant analogy! It really does appear to be the king throwing coins at his favored people.
BTW, much love and respect to TPM!!! What exactly do "real" reporters do with all their time and resources? I mean, aside from the image consultants.
Thad wrote on May 2, 2007 12:44 PM:Hey, flailey, I brought up Calvinball first!
mbbsdphile wrote on May 2, 2007 12:48 PM:I can easily draw a distinction between Fitzgerald and Mercer.
Fitzgerald was appointed to run a single, if high-profile and complex, extra investigation. An extension of what he does every day as US Attorney in Chicago. It required that he be absent from Chicago, but nowhere near as frequently as Mercer. Fitz or his aides would routinely travel anyway, since not all their targets, witnesses, evidence, etc., in every case would actually be in Illinois. Fitz would have been absent mostly when presenting evidence to the grand jury and during the trial.
Mr. Mercer's moonlighting was as one of the permanent top executives at Main Justice. His duties would have been fundamentally different and, at times, in direct conflict with his responsibilities as US Attorney in Montana.
He was absent from his diistrict 90% of time, and stil is, which requires that he maintain a second home in veerry expensive Metro DC, at taxpayer expense. Which means that taxpayers get far less work done for about the same money.
Mercer's DC staffers, and his entire function in DC, are not well-served because their boss is "doing" double duty, or pretending to.
The citizens of Montana are given a shiv because Mercer is not there to motivate or lead his people, to advocate for resources or their priorities or cases, or to protect them from pressures from DC. He is not there to build credibility with courts, investgative agencies, the local bar, and the people most affected when federal crimes are committed and civil rights are unenforced.
Even if Mercer's local deputy is good, he or she is still less functional because short-staffed and because he's paying for Mercer's salary without getting anything in return. He or she must also constantly check with Mercer in DC. No competent bureaucrat would allow Mercer to be blindsided, and he or she would make sure Mercer was on the hook for major decisions because he's the one with the legal authority and responsibility for the office.
All in, a typical dog's breakfast cooked up by Little George. The Man Who Would be King, and who would trash everything in Washington before he leaves.
jdw wrote on May 2, 2007 12:52 PM:The Patriot Act reauthorization is here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:6:./temp/~c109HtHKP5::
Someone might want to take the time to study it to walk through everything it does.
Security Code: regret
mdco wrote on May 2, 2007 12:55 PM:"Mercer had a GOP Senate staffer insert into a bill a provision that would change the rules".
So nobody reads those bills before they are signed into law. What about all those staffers (most of them lawyers) every congressman or woman has? What are they paid for?
my wrote on May 2, 2007 12:56 PM:As far a dual appointments go, Patrick Fitzgerald was USA in Chicago and Special Prosecutor in DC, too. He probably had expenses paid while he was in DC for the investigation and trial.
mbbsdphile wrote on May 2, 2007 1:04 PM:Those who blog in haste will repent at leisure. No personal attacks, please, even in jest. Onkel Karl is listening. Focus on the issues and what you would do about them.
Anonymous wrote on May 2, 2007 1:11 PM:The sneaky law change benefits Mercer, a handful of other senior Justice officials, also applies to assistant U.S. attorneys. So says the WaPo article .
And now we find " Mercer has been nominated for appointment to the DOJ job permanently."
Let's see...how many others are absent from their states?
Gfriffin? Palouse?Oh, yeah, notice the article adresses "whether Gonzales was aware of it at the time he wrote to Molloy".
Aware? awake? Alert?
Be a lert..everybody needs one.
kreine wrote on May 2, 2007 1:12 PM:I wrote to Senator Boxer when she voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act - I was shocked. Interestingly, it's the only email I ever sent her that garnered NO response. None. Perhaps, even she knew it was a mistake but was afraid to discuss it??
How about we revoke the Patriot Act and take those 'permanent' provisions and throw them all out the window. Start from scratch. The baby in this bathwater is actually a hog, Alice.
Austin Cooper wrote on May 2, 2007 1:14 PM:"As far a dual appointments go, Patrick Fitzgerald was USA in Chicago..."
Please put down the red herring. Please tell us your point *isn't* that you're comparing Fitzgerald (an assigned U.S. Attorney who was appointed as a Special Prosecutor for a specific investigation), with Mercer -- who was holding two *separate, assigned federal jobs* in violation of law.. until he had it altered to suit him.
Thought so.
regular lurker wrote on May 2, 2007 1:18 PM:Montana: I can't help but wonder if it's mining related, like WR Grace's asbestos contamination of an entire town. Click linkie
Bear wrote on May 2, 2007 1:33 PM:And don't forget: Per Diem pay isn't reportable as income to the IRS!
phil james wrote on May 2, 2007 1:59 PM:gchaucer2
Just joking. But if this provision were in place it probably would not come as a great shock.
Adam C. wrote on May 2, 2007 2:26 PM:Hmmm.... Also in Monica Goodling's scrawls we find the following ad hoc rationalization about why they fired USA McKay:
"...traveled outside district promoting policy when his job was to run policy."
I mean, she says that like it's a BAD thing.
Anacher Forester wrote on May 2, 2007 2:53 PM:Rep. Waxman should subpoena the expense accounts for those doing double duty immediately. Once upon a time, when I was a highly paid executive, my expense account was considered part of my compensation. It was over 20% of my yearly salary. As long as I didn't do anything completely and obviously crazy I could spend it largely as I pleased.
I'm sure these guys weren't paid yearly salaries for both jobs. However, their total "compensation" packages could very well be in excess of the combined salaries. I'm confident that they never had to pay out of pocket for any meals, travel or entertainment. It wouldn't surprise me if a slush fund of sorts existed at DOJ to further compensate these loyal "Bushies."
AF
Baffled wrote on May 2, 2007 3:00 PM:Possible tax fraud and obstruction of justice, glaring conflict of interest - in a normal administration, this would be a juicy little scandal all by itself.
Maybe all these Mr. Weatherby look-alikes will ultimately hang on despite everything from sheer endemic Citizen Outrage Fatigue.
Go Ask Alice wrote on May 2, 2007 3:26 PM:Great questions barrelhse, JoeB and Jim:
What else, indeed, is tucked into the so-called "Patriot Act"? It appears to be a veritable Trojan horse of tools for corrupt rethuglicans to manipulate our laws and criminal justice system. That casts a whole new light on the term "criminal justice system". I guess in the rethuglican world, the justice system is supposed to protect criminals! Or, at least, when the criminals are them.
I have been opposed to the "Patriot Act" and it's Reauthorization from day 1. Luckily, not all of us are so easily duped. Now, I'd like to hear from people who supported it, how the hell do we get rid of it???
I think our esteemed senior senator from PA, former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, whose aide supposedly 'slipped' the provision on appointing AG's without Senate confirmation in to the Reauthorization, supposedly without his knowledge, is the key to this. In my opinion, he has a LOT of explaining to do and perhaps should be supoenaed himself. Can you say, cold day in hell?
Nevertheless, we all need to write to Congress and insist that the Patriot Act be repealed and that this "Trojan Horse" scandal be thoroughly investigated, starting with Arlen Specter and his mysterious aide.
one of the people wrote on May 2, 2007 4:53 PM:Can someone post a list of every Senator that voted for the Patriot Act renewal?
Long Memory wrote on May 2, 2007 6:26 PM:I hope next time Specter runs for re-election that someone will point out what an easy mark he is for the Bush administration. He has denied he knew they stuck that stuff into the Patriot Act, so he's either lying or he's stupid as the day is long.
They way they moved on that stuff, it's obvious the administration knew it could do anything and get away with it.
Specter always talked a good game (oversight, torture, etc.), but he has always fallen into line.
Dean HIser wrote on May 2, 2007 8:08 PM:You've driven another nail into the gallows of this administration! It was very impressive to see TPM on Moyers' new show. Thanks for all you do and especially for the great work on this story.
psyopswatcher wrote on May 3, 2007 12:40 AM:For Uncle Montana:
Chief Judge Donald Molloy (406) 542-7286
http://www.mtd.uscourts.gov/staff.htm
Found it on the googles.