« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Senators Request Secret Order from DoJ
A bipartisan group of senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote to Alberto Gonzales today, demanding a copy of the secret order Gonzales signed in March of 2006. The order, the existence of which was first reported by Murray Waas, gave authority over the hiring and firing of most political employees of the Justice Department to Gonzales' chief of staff Kyle Sampson and White House liaison Monica Goodling.
The senators also wondered why the order was not among the thousands of pages turned over to Congress over the past months -- documents that were relevant to the U.S. attorney firings. Since the order would seem to affect the appointment of interim U.S. attorneys, it should have been among them, they write.
Comments (10)
DiFi Fan wrote on May 2, 2007 4:09 PM:We're cooking with gas!
Citizen 92 wrote on May 2, 2007 4:17 PM:What I really want to know is who over at the White House is signing off on these political appointments.
It is the White House Office of Presidential Personnel that determines who gets placed in the various Schedule C, non-career SES, non-carrer appointment and (sometimes) Schedule A and B jobs.
Oftentimes, it's Presidential Personnel that dictates to Agencies which politicals they are going to be receiving and what jobs they will be placed in.
It would be a radical departure having the DOJ telling OPP who they were going to hire.
This tells me two things:
1/Either the Office of Presidential Personnel over at the White House is so patently incompetent that it cannot even place GOP standard bearers in the political jobs; or
2/OPP was cut out of the picture entirely and hiring is being run out of Rove's shop -- and the "secret order" was his accommodation.
Remember, too, at the end of the day, ALL APPOINTEES serve at the "pleasure of the President" and their appointments must receive signoff from the President, under his own hand. The White House Staff Secretary would prepare a hiring list with regularity.
[Unless this authority has been illegally delegated away as well].
Rebel wrote on May 2, 2007 4:29 PM:I smell a rat with this one.
Why didn't Leahy sign? Why is GOP appoligist and front man Sessions signing? Is this something bogus that has be trumped up and leaked only to be discounted later to put this whole investigation into question?
PrgrsvArchitect wrote on May 2, 2007 4:38 PM:Arlen Specter continues to pretend that he knew nothing of the Patriot Act provision that his aide slipped in? Interesting that the aide ended up as one of the new USAs.
From DKos diary today by Jesselyn Radack (former DOJ employee)
"The Republican Senate staffer who inserted the pernicious provision was Bett Tolman--then counsel to Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). Tolman is now the U.S. Attorney in Utah."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/2/62425/86437
Caligirl wrote on May 2, 2007 4:43 PM:Called Leahy's office and they say he signed it, the copy posted was posted before he signed it. The girl I asked said she has a copy with his signature.
SC: school
Jake wrote on May 2, 2007 8:02 PM:The democrats will give Fredo a stern schooling in the importance of integrity. He has none.
First of all, no one ASKED Gonzales this question. Second, what "law" prevents U.S. Attorneys being appointed based on political party?
Jake wrote on May 2, 2007 10:47 PM:Can U.S. Attorneys be appointed based on membership in the Federalist Society?
ewastud wrote on May 3, 2007 5:06 AM:It is very interesting and telling that Murray Waas, a reporter, was able to get this piece of information from presumably a DoJ insider whistleblower when it was not provided to the Judiciary Committee in response to their earlier requests, as we should have expected. It seems that we must rely on these whistlebowers to help get the truth out from under from these professional liars occupying the White House and the DoJ upper ranks. It is gratifying to know that there are such public-spirited and courageous people in the DoJ to help expose the criminals at the top.
bobh wrote on May 3, 2007 9:12 AM:Decent FUD jake. Your a repuplican/conservative/wingnuttroll from Kos and I recognize you.
We're talking about the illegality of career emplpoyees at executive deparments being hired based on Pol Part, not us attorneys.
If membership in the Federalist society was used as a determinor of employment it is indeed a violation of federal hiring practices. You look up the fucking law.
Picking career employees of ANY executive branch department based on their political views is INDEED a violation of LONG STANDING law and tradition.
Nice try.
Joe wrote on May 3, 2007 9:33 AM:Actually hiring premised on Federalist Society membership might not be per se illegal. Hiring on political party certainly is - it violates several civil service laws (though many of these people may not be, in fact civil service - career positions probably are), may violate the Hatch Act (at least insofar as there is political pressure to donate, campaign etc. after they have the job), etc.
The most shocking thing is the ham handedness of this entire process. Hell their are mayors that can figure out how to get rid of the "other guys" and hire "my guys" with more aplomb that this! While there is no requirement that one be subtle when one is in power - being as sublte as Wile E. Coyote's falling safe is probably not wise use of power! Thus, what's almost more annoying than their corruption is their abject stupidity!
I'm suspicious as to what Sesssions is doing on the letter too - there is another way to look at it though: if this is the start of him going the other way on AG/AG - they are in bigger trouble than they thougt.