Comments (101)

jmccw wrote on May 7, 2007 9:37 AM:

good stuff from WJLA. kudos to them.

Martin Abschutz wrote on May 7, 2007 9:38 AM:

". . . the Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice."

Damning with faint praise? Indeed.

ch2 wrote on May 7, 2007 9:39 AM:

That's their defense ? The most diverse department is 96% white ? Wow.

Code: potato. As in, they are in hot ones.

gb2/tx/ wrote on May 7, 2007 9:39 AM:

>>the Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice.

If you count the cleaning crew....

Nestor wrote on May 7, 2007 9:40 AM:

I bet they think diversity is having a few women around... you know, for typing and filing and to dress up the place.

code: Mark, as in 'Mark my words'

AJ wrote on May 7, 2007 9:41 AM:

Might want to change complimentary to complementary. I can't imagine that Conyers is planning anything too complimentary.

TheraP wrote on May 7, 2007 9:46 AM:

I wonder if they also tend to hire baby-faced people because this does seem to be in the "karl mode." Sometimes I have literally wondered if the ones who lack the "baby face" get silicone shots to make their faces look rounder. (look at Rich Lowry's cheeks, I'm not kidding!)

White, baby-faced people, from Regent. That's a cross-section, right?

I suspect there is some research that people who look this way are "believable" or non-threatening (or something). Just goes to show your eyes can lie.

Hermagoras wrote on May 7, 2007 9:46 AM:

I thought my cynicism had reached a limit. But none? Oh. My. God.

Security code: "adjust." Good advice, but with this crew? Not bloody likely.

conniptionfit wrote on May 7, 2007 9:46 AM:

Wanta bet that the "civil rights division as a whole" includes all the secretaries and janitors?

Anonymous wrote on May 7, 2007 9:48 AM:

You can infer from this that only 4% of the African American population is also Republican. And we at the Civil Rights Division, although only hiring Republicans, do not consider race as a reason.

Anonymous wrote on May 7, 2007 9:55 AM:

Doesn’t Clarence Thomas have any kids?

ShawnHarmon wrote on May 7, 2007 9:59 AM:

"Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice."

If you count the janitors and secretaries!

steve duncan wrote on May 7, 2007 10:02 AM:

Support staff is very important to every organization. This is not a slam on them or the work they do. However, I suspect when DOJ says "....the Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice" there may be sleight of hand involved. What do you want to bet those numbers include janitorial staff, food services, drivers and any number of other jobs sometimes heavily populated by minorities? When the subject is apples conservatives almost always want to talk about oranges.

bryan wrote on May 7, 2007 10:03 AM:

So, i guess the administrations employment of Condi and Colin were the equivalent of of placing two Jocko style lawn jockeys. "Hey got black people. Some are even my best friends." I'd say this is par for the course.

dweb wrote on May 7, 2007 10:04 AM:

How many times have you heard Fredo state he has never forgotten where he came from?

Fredo has fogotten quite a lot it appears....

DiFi Fan wrote on May 7, 2007 10:05 AM:

A Lorena Gonzalez, Confidential Asst/Press Aide, was listed as #2 at the DOJ Office of Public Affairs in 2001. Does she count as a minority?

bwindrip wrote on May 7, 2007 10:09 AM:

We all know damned well that the DOJ is counting every last body on the payroll, regardless of position.

Lawrence wrote on May 7, 2007 10:11 AM:

I am sure that the DOJ hired a very diverse group of lawyers for the Civil Rights Division, representing Christians of most evangelical sects.

TheraP wrote on May 7, 2007 10:11 AM:

Probably, anyone with a Spanish last name does, whether they are a minority or not. If a woman marries someone with a Spanish last name, then, bingo!

(just looking at last names may skew the numbers here)

r€nato wrote on May 7, 2007 10:11 AM:

You people just don't get it. The White Male Republican is a minority in this country and fast approaching extinction.

Why it's getting to the point that a white male can hardly be guaranteed a job or a promotion over a more deserving woman or minority any longer.

DiFi Fan wrote on May 7, 2007 10:16 AM:

TheraP@May 7, 2007 10:11 AM

Re Lorena Gonzalez,Confidential Asst/Press Aide
- I wonder if she is the AG's daughter. If she is, Lorena hardly qualifies as a minority hire.

Lorena worked for Barbara Comstock and with Monica Goodling, Mark Corallo and Dana Perino.

Heh wrote on May 7, 2007 10:16 AM:

Of all the scandals this by far touches all Americans and hits at our gut; dramatically affecting the system of American government as it erodes the advances of the past 50 years in Civil Rights. Bill Clinton set us on the bridge to the 21st century, their efforts take us backward to Jim Crow's past.Who would of thunk it?

They've got the talking points down too,if they aren't stonewalling, they're telling you up is down or that there is no there there. Worse than Bill Clinton with: "depends what is is"

This kind of fuckery will send the wrong message about our government and why we should impeach all of them.What it is teaching our kids about values and the rule of law is discouraging.

This can't be said enough: the most corrupt administration and we're all witness.

Elisabet wrote on May 7, 2007 10:18 AM:

In 2002 KPMG Consulting prepared a Diversity Analysis Report for the DOJ; the WJLA website has posted for comparison both the intact report and the *heavily* retracted version that was originally released.

*All* the key findings and recommendations are blacked out in the redacted version - heh, maybe that is the version they gave to the AG. He'll be able to claim he has no memory of seeing any evidence of problems with the hiring patterns in the DOJ...

Todd wrote on May 7, 2007 10:19 AM:

Where is the story, here? I want to see these guys sink as much as anyone, but this story is infantile? How many African Americans applied for jobs with the civil rights division? Were they the best qualified applicants? I understand that they wanted to see your voter reg card before they hired you, but that's hardly related to this claim.

Do you have ANY evidence that they DIDN'T hire the best applicants because they were black? Has anybody looked into the racial profile of students graduating from law school? 2 black prosecutors out of 50 is about the right profile if DOJ prosecuors are to be a cross section of attorneys in our country. Where does this affirmative action nonsense end?

Besides, they (the Bush admin.) has Condi. Some of their best friends are black! (to end with a lighter note)...

jeffgee wrote on May 7, 2007 10:21 AM:

Schlozman is a schmuck.

TheraP wrote on May 7, 2007 10:22 AM:

DiFi Fan:

If you are of minority descent, no matter the percentage, then you are considered a minority.

And I can assure you that the republicans are trying to snag ANYONE with a Hispanic last name - regardless of how they got it. (trust me)

They don't care whether you've got it in your "blood" (code word) or not - so long as you drink the cool aide and have the right last name. Or whatever.... maybe they count amputees and so forth... cross-eyed... who knows?

And yes, all republicans are now minorities, and their numbers are shrinking by the day.

terry wrote on May 7, 2007 10:24 AM:

What is the Black % of the population? Isn't it about 12%?
If that is true, then 2 of 50 is 10%, right?
Are we talking about 2%?
Don't really know how minority hiring works, but isn't it based on fair representation of population?

Sharon A wrote on May 7, 2007 10:27 AM:

"..the Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice"

This phrase contains no useful information. It is flotsam from the collision of our language with BushLiars, Inc.

It's just another word-bomb from them. At this point, I am not capable of being shocked or awed by this tactic. So I conclude the intent was to mock the audience.

aceflyer wrote on May 7, 2007 10:29 AM:

re: "2 black prosecutors out of 50 is about the right profile if DOJ prosecutors are to be a cross section of attorneys in our country."

But as the article clearly states, they have hired zero black attorneys. Zip. Zilch. Nada. 0% is not about the right profile of law school graduates.

Beth wrote on May 7, 2007 10:31 AM:

All the hires at the Civil Rights Division in the Bush Administration are tainted. Client agencies will look askance at any attorney who was hired in the 21st century. This is a sad development.

UhOh wrote on May 7, 2007 10:31 AM:

In response to terry, you ARE kidding, right? 2 of 50 is 4%. and 4% is 1/3 of 12%. If it's numbers you're looking at, relative to population, then African-Americans would under-represented by 2/3. That's not a statistical anomaly, that's a plan.

TheraP wrote on May 7, 2007 10:32 AM:

2 of 50 = 4%

"bent" - as in some are bending the rules of math!

jim wrote on May 7, 2007 10:34 AM:

*Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice* Yes it probably is. It has 2 blacks, all the other divisions have even fewer. A new word is needed to describe what the Bush and the GOP has done to destroy the DOJ and Interior and Education and the GSA and .. and,, - something beyond outrageous.

TheraP wrote on May 7, 2007 10:35 AM:

new word: ethnic cleansing?

litigatormom wrote on May 7, 2007 10:35 AM:

More troublesome to me than the fact that only 4% of the lawyers at the Civil Rights Division are African American is the fact that the Division has hired NO African Americans since 2003. The two African American lawyers currently employed by the Division may well have been there from the Clinton Administration or beyond.

This means one of either two things: (1) no African Americans are applying for jobs in what used to be, at least, the Division supposedly protecting their own civil rights as well as those of other minorities, which tells you something right there; or (2) there are no black members of the Federalist Socity or black alumni of Regent University Law School.

Anonymous wrote on May 7, 2007 10:36 AM:

Taken as a whole, they're including janitors,office staff, etc.

Spencer's Mom wrote on May 7, 2007 10:40 AM:

Terry, your math seems to be about as good as the GOP. Two (2) out of 50 is 4%, not 10%. So if 4% of the attorneys are African American, and, according to you, African Americans represent 12% of the total population (seems low, but let's go with your number...) then we have a ratio totally out of balance, but a multiple of three (3).

Of course, approx. 51% of Americans are female, and I truly doubt that 26 or more of these attorneys are women.

r€nato wrote on May 7, 2007 10:42 AM:

This is payback against blacks for not supporting the GOP.

Think I'm kidding? I'm not. There is NOTHING they do, that doesn't have a political calculation behind it.

NOTHING.

Fred McClaren wrote on May 7, 2007 10:48 AM:

What I find sickening about all this is how our major news organizations and Washington press bureaus have failed to report on any of the abuses that are now coming to light.

It now seems obvious to me that the phrase "permanent republican majority" represented nothing less than a covert attempt to subvert our democratic system.

All of this was nothing short of a coup attempt! The K-Street project, a total lack of congressional oversight, stocking the bureaucracy with conservative ideologues, allowing industry lobbyists to actually right legislation, the use of the Patriot Act to justify the infringement of our personal liberties and grant additional powers to the executive branch to spy on and intimidate our citizens ... particularly those who aren't "loyal Bushies."

Think about it, people! If all this had continued unchallenged, the ultra conservatives wouldn't have had to worry about using the legislative process to roll back all the progressive legislation that has been passed in the last forty years ... they could just use their stranglehold on our government to reinterpret and enforce the rules as they see fit.

We are now uncovering what is nothing less than an attempt at a fascist takeover of our government. Those who don't believe me should re-read the definition:

A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Now tell me that isn't where the "permanent republican majority" crowd aren't trying to take us!

MonkeyBoy wrote on May 7, 2007 10:48 AM:

I would be real interested in the non-Caucasian percentage of plaintiffs for the cases that that division prosecuted.

mbbsdphil wrote on May 7, 2007 10:49 AM:

Bob Woodward in his dotage may be courting the dark side, but the lingo from his days as an investigative reporter, working with Bob Bernstein to uncover Watergate, lives on. The Justice Dept's recent non-denial denial about Brad Schlozman is a good example.

Defending Schlozman's hiring record by saying that it made the Civil Rights Division the most diverse one at the DOJ says nothing about diversity. It just says that Main Justice as a whole is less diverse than the division, which isn't diverse at all.

Apart from Federalist Society and Regent University grads, admittedly minorities, but not ordinarily considered ones it would be useful to promote, Mr. Schlozman hired people who met Ken Mehlman's criteria (from Think Progress).

Mr. Mehlman didn't want the best available people to run govt; he wanted the best he could get who would be loyal to George Bush. He got Monica Goodlings and Brownie at FEMA. Last time I checked, Latin America juntas and West African dictatorships were not considered examples to emulate.

Troubling wrote on May 7, 2007 10:55 AM:

The dirty little secret is that main Justice has had a dismal record of hiring African-American attorneys for many years. Quite a few offices have an all-white attorney staff, with an all-black secretarial pool, and the problem predates Bush 43. But no doubt about it, the Bushies have made a bad situation even worse. Whatever efforts there were to encourage minority hiring seem to have evaporated.

terry wrote on May 7, 2007 10:57 AM:

Sorry guys. I am sometimes too dry for my own good.
Was trying to do a combo "Jaywalking/Fuzzy Math" thing this am.
Glad to know you all passed.

mbbsdphil wrote on May 7, 2007 10:57 AM:

Apologies to "Carl" Bernstein. Where are you, man? We need you still.

TruthSeeker wrote on May 7, 2007 10:59 AM:

I am shocked and awed about this. NOT!

Security Code: Screw. No comment is necessary...

John Henry wrote on May 7, 2007 11:22 AM:

No one should be shocked, shocked by this revelation.

There are simply more racists in the ranks of GOPers than in the reanks of the Dem party.

That's one of the big attractions of the GOP: They favor policies and practices that hinder the ascension of minorities.
The campaigns of Reagan and Bush One were loaded with coded rascism. Immigrant bashing is serving that purpose now. Recall "quotas"? It is/was a code word for keep blacks in their place and don't let them take that job you're entitled to.

TruthSeeker. NOT! wrote on May 7, 2007 11:24 AM:

It is becoming painfully clear that many conservatives only support our Constitution when they believe it supports their belief. However, they don't seem to mind seeing the portions that go against their personal belief system being trampled and ignored.

Supdog wrote on May 7, 2007 11:28 AM:

I don't get it. If DOJ has been keeping its Civil Rights Division stocked with purebred Republicans, how come there are only two blacks?

Gimme a minute...[sound of grinding gears]...

security code: bent. As in crooked.

djcrow22 wrote on May 7, 2007 11:31 AM:

Here is an interesting tie in with station WJLA which did the reporting mentioned here...
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/05/04/politico_funding/

parrot wrote on May 7, 2007 11:32 AM:

I'd like to see some outrage in Congress over this one. Anyone? Anyone?

mbbsdphil wrote on May 7, 2007 11:32 AM:

Excellent article by Tim Shorrock at Salon.com on George Tenet. His full-time services as Director of Central Intelligence cost the US Govt less than $200,000 per year. In the past year, he's earned over $2,000,000 working for govt contractors - who will be reimbursed for that cost, plus profit, by that same govt - and over $4,000,000 for his Tell Nothing book.

The most troubling source of income is his work for firms that have become the privatized arms of the US intelligence community. Rabid, rampant privatization, even more than Iraq or the politicization of the US Govt, is likely to be George Bush's most destructive legacy.

Wars end, govts change, countries and govts rebuild. But most organizations that privatize have so much committed to it, often blindly, that they couldn't undo it. They forget what they did and how they did it; they no longer keep tabs on whether it's really more efficient or cost-effective, since those studies are usually outsourced, too.

Same with Mr. Bush's rape and pillage of the US Govt. His Governmentectomy means that our uniformed services could no longer go to war without their Halliburtons. Our "intelligence" services, the GSA, IRS audits and collections, you name it, are equally hampered. Even the inspectors general - who are supposed to keep tabs on how well such things work, whether they're legal and whether taxpayers get what they're paying for - are being privatized. Which is costing taxpayers a packet.

The US Govt - the only profitable business George Bush has ever run. Like buying tainted food from China, who really pays for George Bush's and George Tenet's profis?

mbbsdphil wrote on May 7, 2007 11:33 AM:

Excellent article by Tim Shorrock at Salon.com on George Tenet. His full-time services as Director of Central Intelligence cost the US Govt less than $200,000 per year. In the past year, he's earned over $2,000,000 working for govt contractors - who will be reimbursed for that cost, plus profit, by that same govt - and over $4,000,000 for his Tell Nothing book.

The most troubling source of income is his work for firms that have become the privatized arms of the US intelligence community. Rabid, rampant privatization, even more than Iraq or the politicization of the US Govt, is likely to be George Bush's most destructive legacy.

Wars end, govts change, countries and govts rebuild. But most organizations that privatize have so much committed to it, often blindly, that they couldn't undo it. They forget what they did and how they did it; they no longer keep tabs on whether it's really more efficient or cost-effective, since those studies are usually outsourced, too.

Same with Mr. Bush's rape and pillage of the US Govt. His Governmentectomy means that our uniformed services could no longer go to war without their Halliburtons. Our "intelligence" services, the GSA, IRS audits and collections, you name it, are equally hampered. Even the inspectors general - who are supposed to keep tabs on how well such things work, whether they're legal and whether taxpayers get what they're paying for - are being privatized. Which is costing taxpayers a packet.

The US Govt - the only profitable business George Bush has ever run. Like buying tainted food from China, who really pays for George Bush's and George Tenet's profis?

Ben Dover wrote on May 7, 2007 11:40 AM:

I work for a Federal agency whose "civil rights" division is made up entirely of women, blacks, and hispanics. There's not a male in the office and not a white face to be seen. Of course "civil rights" as a part of Human Resoruces is nothing more than a legal way to "get" white males. Maybe in the long run the hiring record of the DOJ civil rights division is a good deal. At least we dont have overzealous blacks trying to get whitey for their long forgotten great great great grandparents having to be enslaved by the long forgotten great great great grandparents of a white guy who could care less.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 7, 2007 11:46 AM:

The US Attorneys' Office tends to be a recruiting ground for future government officals especially judges. The built-in respectabilty of the office (pre-Bush) made it the perfect ground to find fair minded folk. Now we are going to have to check the dates of service for the next sixty years . . . GRRRRRRRR.

gmb wrote on May 7, 2007 11:46 AM:

A friend of mine who works closely with Federal law enforcement in Kansas City tells me that Todd Graves the USA forced out in Kansas City to be replaced by Schlozman is now working for the Republican National Comittee?

Has anyone looked into this? It sure looks like an attempt to keep him quiet.

psyopswatcher wrote on May 7, 2007 11:49 AM:

Posted by: steve duncan
10:02 AM

"What do you want to bet those numbers include janitorial staff, food services, drivers and any number of other jobs sometimes heavily populated by minorities?"

What you want to bet those are the civil service jobs that went privatized and are now all contracted out to Friends of Doan and other Funnel, Inc.?

DOL should be looking at these numbers too.

Poor Oppressed Whites wrote on May 7, 2007 11:49 AM:

Hey Ben Dover ... what Federal agency do you work for? Please tell us so we won't just file your nonsense under "Urban Legends."

While I wouldn't argue that affirmative action can go too far, I think the overall picture hardly supports a case for white male suppression.

In the words of Chris Rock when it comes to blacks and other minorities in the country having it better than whites, "Have you taken a look around this m..... f..... lately?"

deepsouthdoug wrote on May 7, 2007 11:50 AM:

Civil Rights Division should be renamed the Jim Crow Justice Division!

deepsouthdoug wrote on May 7, 2007 11:51 AM:

Civil Rights Division should be renamed the Jim Crow Justice Division!

jdw wrote on May 7, 2007 12:05 PM:

I tend to think they're going to get utterly fucked the more Bradley Schlozman gets investigated.

John

Lois Starr wrote on May 7, 2007 12:11 PM:

If all the hires have come from the Regent University then none will be African American I'm sure.

unionmember wrote on May 7, 2007 12:14 PM:

So, assuming a dem gets elected in '08 how does s/he fix this?

TruthSeeker wrote on May 7, 2007 12:19 PM:

I work for a Federal agency whose "civil rights" division is made up entirely of women, blacks, and hispanics.
Posted by: Ben Dover
Date: May 7, 2007 11:40 AM

I would really like for you to produce proof of this because I think your statements are complete malarkey, and that's an understatement. I would appreciate it if you could prove me wrong.

Security Code: white. Oh, this is too funny!

mo2 wrote on May 7, 2007 12:19 PM:

Regarding: permanent republican majority = coup attempt
The Federal Reserve allowed interest rates to remain too low, encouraging spending and not saving. Lack of Congressional oversight allowed people to borrow against their homes which encouraged overspending - and which is now resulting in a "rentor society." The American public was mollified while Bushco attempted a coup. (PNAC)

Todd wrote on May 7, 2007 12:20 PM:

Sorry folks, you aren't getting it. Far fewer than 12% of attorneys in the US are black. If the DOJ is hiring qualified applicants, then the number should probably mirror the ratio of black attorneys in the US, not the percent of the population that is black.

There is no story here. When there are so many avenues open to attack the administration, pick one that is real.

donviti wrote on May 7, 2007 12:22 PM:

here's a question. How many blacks are in the Federal Society?

2strange wrote on May 7, 2007 12:23 PM:

Every Federal Agency keeps track of the break down of gender, race and GS level and updates it on a regular basis

Elisabet wrote on May 7, 2007 12:25 PM:

When the DOJ claims that the Civil Rights Division is the "most diverse" in the department, are they specifically talking about racial diversity, or are they clouding the issue with gender diversity figures? The 2002 Diversity Report shows that a lot of women were being hired at that time, particularly through the Honors program (i.e. recruiting directly from law school).

jdw wrote on May 7, 2007 12:34 PM:

Why would anyone bother responding to someone posting as "Ben Dover"? Does he need to post as "Mike Hunt" before the trolling becomes obvious?

Security Code: "butter", rather fittingly...

El Borba wrote on May 7, 2007 12:38 PM:

Todd, there certainly are several stories here. If you want some interesting info, check out not only the total counts, but the distribution of minorities and women in the higher-paying ranks (which you can find in the version of the report without redaction). There are some very readable bar graphs that make these points quite clearly.
So, after you consider the distribution of minority and female lawyers in the general population, are you arguing that among all lawyers in the population, minority and female attorneys are inferior to white male attorneys?

Roy S wrote on May 7, 2007 12:39 PM:

As Richard Ugelow, the former deputy section chief of the employment section in the Civil Rights Division puts it, "We would sue employers for having numbers like that."

They would sue employers for having only two black employees among 50 total? If those employers were making completely racially unbiased hiring choices from the general US population (12.8% black according to the Census), probability theory predicts that 3.68% of them would have two or fewer black employees among 50. If those employers were making completely racially unbiased hiring choices from among US lawyers (3.9% black according to http://www.lawschool.com/dwindling.htm) as the Justice Department might, the probability is that 69% of them would have two or fewer black employees among 50.

Now, obviously not all lawyers will have the same credentials or be attracted to the same jobs, and it's possible to make more complicated assumptions which raise or lower those probabilities. But for innumerate people like Ugelow to denounce or threaten to sue a group for failing to meet his arbitrary numerical quotas is ridiculous.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 7, 2007 12:41 PM:

Ashcroft's deputy attorney general, Larry D. Thompson, is black. According to Wikipedia, Thompson oversaw prosecutions against officials at Enron. Which, imo, doesn't say much about Thompson. A lot of Enron's crimes were covered up.

Jack Neefus wrote on May 7, 2007 12:59 PM:

I'm surprised the official reply didn't follow in the James Watts vein:

What are you talking about? I have a black, a woman, two Jews, and a cripple.

Steve5117 wrote on May 7, 2007 1:02 PM:

Mrs P

What do you know, about Aaron Peter Avila. He argued case for DOJ, North Carolina Eastern District (No. 05-1405) Aug. 2005.

Case with a lot of environmental issues with Navy's desire to build jet air base.

TheraP wrote on May 7, 2007 1:11 PM:

What's the probability of trolls posting if there is NO threat to repubs?

What's the probability that this thread is a big threat - and thus so much troll activity?

It's all in the numbers:

...Zero blacks hired in the civil rights division.

...Many trolls hired to post here!

You could do a nice statistical analysis right here today, and I'd guess we'd find significance

DjW wrote on May 7, 2007 1:15 PM:

". . . the Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice."

Cool! It's like The Manchurian Candidate meets 1984.

tjallen wrote on May 7, 2007 1:23 PM:

Wow the comments show there are racists here, too!

Roy, Ugelow's numbers are not arbitrary, they are based on % of the population. Also, the law does NOT say companies are expected to be distributed around some mean, it says all companies must rise above certain floors. A company does not avoid prsecution by claiming thay fall within some Q of a standard deviation.

Not good enough, always trying to get better. Status quo is not okay. It's not all about where we actually are, it is about where we ought to be.

tofubo wrote on May 7, 2007 1:41 PM:

". . . the Civil Rights Division as a whole is the most diverse office in the Department of Justice."

so, does that mean all the other offices are less than 1/25th mintority ??

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 7, 2007 1:41 PM:

Steve5117@May 7, 2007 01:02 PM

Aaron Peter Avila is fairly young. He graduated from St Mary's High School in Stockton California in 1995 and lives with his wife, Catherine, in DC.

I found three cases associated with Avila, all environmental in nature. In the 2005 FRIENDS OF YOSEMITE VALLEY v. Norton appeal, Avila is listed as being with Morrison and Foerster LLP in San Fran. Maybe Avila left the DOJ to return to California.

#1
No. 05-1405

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

194 F. Supp. 2d 1066; 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6377

FRIENDS OF THE RIVER, amicus: Aaron Peter Avila, Morrison and Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA.

[I don't know which side Avila was on.]

http://classweb.gmu.edu/jkozlows/baxter.htm

#2
No. 03-30648
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

385 F.3d 884; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 20682; 59 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 932; 161 Oil & Gas Rep. 789

SANTE FE SNYDER CORP; OCEAN ENERGY INC; BASIN EXPLORATION INC; SHELL OFFSHORE INC; DEVON ENERGY PRODUCTION COMPANY LP, formerly known as Sante Fe Snyder Corp; DEVON SFS OPERATING INC; STONE ENERGY LLC, formerly known as Basin Exploration Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. GALE NORTON, Secretary Department of Interior; REBECCA WATSON, Assistant Secretary Land and Minerals Management, Department of Interior; REJANE MEDINGER BURTON, Director Minerals Management Service, Department of Interior, Defendants-Appellants

Counsel:
For SANTA FE SNYDER CORP, OCEAN ENERGY INC, BASIN EXPLORATION INC, SHELL OFFSHORE INC, DEVON ENERGY PRODUCTION COMPANY LP fka Santa Fe Snyder Corp, DEVON SFS OPERATING INC, STONE ENERGY LLC fka Basin Exploration Inc, Plaintiffs-Appellees: James Berry St John, Jr, Jonathan Andrew Hunter, Liskow & Lewis, New Orleans, LA.

For GALE NORTON, SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, REBECCA WATSON, Assistant Secretary Land and Minerals Management, Department of the Interior, REJANE MEDINGER BURTON, Department Minerals Management Service, Department of the Interior, Defendants-Appellants: Aaron Peter Avila, US Department of Justice, Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC.

#3
No. 05-1405

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

422 F.3d 174; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 19277; 61 ERC (BNA) 1161; 35 ELR 20183

NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY; NORTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE FEDERATION; DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE; WASHINGTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA; BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; GORDON R. ENGLAND, Secretary of the Navy; HANSFORD T. JOHNSON, Assistant Secretary of the Navy; R. M. FLANAGAN, Major General, U.S. Marine Corps, Commanding General, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, Defendants-Appellants. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INCORPORATED, Amicus Supporting Appellees.

Counsel:
ARGUED: Aaron Peter Avila, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellants.

Kiran H. Mehta, KENNEDY, COVINGTON, LOBDELL & HICKMAN, L.L.P., Charlotte, North Carolina; Derb Stancil Carter, Jr., SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellees.

ON BRIEF: Kelly A. Johnson, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, R. A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, G. Norman Acker, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Stephen G. Bartell, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, D.C.; Robert J. Smith, NAVY LITIGATION OFFICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellants.

Raymond E. Owens, Jr., Christopher C. Lam, KENNEDY, COVINGTON, LOBDELL & HICKMAN, L.L.P., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees Washington County, North Carolina, and Beaufort County, [**2] North Carolina; Michelle B. Nowlin, SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellees National Audubon Society, North Carolina Wildlife Federation, and Defenders of Wildlife.

Sharon Buccino, David Newman, NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae, Natural Resources Defense Council, Supporting Appellees.

I linked to the decision in this case, #3, below.

Let me know if you want more case info.

Node of Evil wrote on May 7, 2007 1:43 PM:

I wonder, if Schlozman is so apolitical in his hiring, how can he be sure that he's hiring people from "across the political spectrum?" I would think that the DoJ would know little to nothing about the political leanings of its employees. After all, how good you are in court and writing briefs has little to do with your political affiliation.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 7, 2007 2:00 PM:

Credit where credit is due. Eric Kayira, a black attorney, is Vice-President and Director of the American Center For Voting Rights Fund (AC4VRF), a GOP front organization set up to disenfranchise black voters.

Kayira is an attorney with St Louis law firm, Blackwell Sanders, specializing in the entertainment business. Prior to joining Blackwell Sanders, Kayira was with another St Louis firm, Lathrop & Gage from 2001 to 2006.

I made a series of comments about Kayira, the AC4VR, the AC4VRF, Lathrop & Gage and other related issues in another TPM MR post about Bradley Schlozman (link below).

Bonnie wrote on May 7, 2007 2:06 PM:

I work for a Federal agency and the Civil Rights/EEO office is the biggest joke in town. You file a complaint and it goes to a black hole to never to be heard of again. Most of those offices are run by people who have their performance appraisal done by the head man; thus, they do whatever it takes to get a good appraisal from the boss.

Steve5117 wrote on May 7, 2007 2:11 PM:

Thanks Mrs. P

No more info right now.

Issue in NC is Navy wants 30,000 acres for jet base with 8,000 ft. runway. Virginia doesn't want/have room for them. (Too noisy, interfers with studies at Regents?)

I always thought closing/give away of NAS Cecil in Jax, FL was crazy. (30,000 acres, three 8,000 ft. runways and one 12,500 ft runway)

Is Avila still wit Gov. or in private practice?

bjobotts wrote on May 7, 2007 2:17 PM:

The damage is done and Scholzman is still there figuring other ways to exclude democrats from governmental agencies. This will come back to haunt us all come election time. I try to have hope where little exist. The only thing I hope for is that Congress will impeach and bar from office Bush/Cheney/Gonzales/Rice and that every single person hired by this administration be fired. Scholzman should be dis-barred and prevented from holding any public office. Until this is done then I am left to conclude mission accomplished, damage done.

Mrs P wrote on May 7, 2007 2:26 PM:

Steve5117@May 7, 2007 02:11 PM

Don't know. I checked and Avila is not with Morrison & Foerster.

I think someone had some fun at Avila's expense and listed him as specializing in divorce on the Lawyer Roster website (link below).

Avila can be reached at the phone number listed, 202-514-1307 so it looks like Avila is still in DC.

Why the interest in Aaron Peter Avila?

Scott L wrote on May 7, 2007 2:31 PM:

As Sonny and Cher would say " And the beat goes on". I still don't understand why these people are not hooked up to one of our goverments favorite toys. THE LIE DETECTOR Does anyone out there know of a good reason the goverment uses them on lower grade employees and not the top dogs?

Steve5117 wrote on May 7, 2007 2:52 PM:

General interest in the different areas that Bush administration felt the need to establish an advantage for their agenda.

Specific interest in environmental issues because of love for oysters and blue crabs. I once met an idiot who explained the financial advantage to his company to pay fines for poluting rather that install abatement equipment. I spilt my drink on him and left.

I believe herr Karl's value has come from the information derived from the various databases he has. (George made him sell the company but they had the data and have built upon it.) What's the worth of all that data, I wonder?

Mike Valentine wrote on May 7, 2007 3:48 PM:

Well it's total political war on behalf of the Neo-Con Job Bush Administration. I recall that Bush is the first M.B.A. President.....

Code Again..... as in. "It will be a cold day in hell when a Republican is President again."

Mike Valentine wrote on May 7, 2007 3:49 PM:

Well it's total political war on behalf of the Neo-Con Job Bush Administration. I recall that Bush is the first M.B.A. President.....

Code Again..... as in. "It will be a cold day in hell when a Republican is President again."

jimbo92107 wrote on May 7, 2007 3:59 PM:

George Bush doesn't like black people, except Condi, who aways does everything he wants.

George doesn't like brown people, either. Except Alberto, who always does everything he wants.

I'm beginning to see a pattern here...

sponson wrote on May 7, 2007 4:19 PM:

Hey trolls, back up your assertion that "far less" than 12% of attorneys in the US are black, AND back up your claim that somehow these would be less "qualified" than others. The real facts are that the average ranking of the law schools from which DOJ has been hiring has PLUMMETED under the Bush Administration.

the man wrote on May 7, 2007 4:35 PM:

the last plantation in DC.

Sevman wrote on May 7, 2007 5:22 PM:

"Doesn’t Clarence Thomas have any kids?"

Umm...not that he knows of. But he does frequently watch porn and chase nappy headed hoes.

Did they do any genetic testing on Anita Hill's kids?

Roy S wrote on May 7, 2007 9:10 PM:

tjallen: "Wow the comments show there are racists here, too!"

I'm sorry that citing my sources, giving mathematical calculations, and insulting an innumerate white person makes me a racist in your eyes. It sounds like your criteria for racism may have as many false positives as Ugelow's. You should work on that.

"Roy, Ugelow's numbers are not arbitrary, they are based on % of the population"

Since my numbers were based on the US Census' percentage of the population, a cited percentage of the lawyer population, and mathematics, I'm going to have to stick with them, although I would like to find a more authoritative citation for the percentage of black lawyers. Do you have information suggesting that my numbers or my calculations (just the sum from 0 to 2 of 50!/(50-n)!/n!*p^(50-n)*(1-p)^n), assuming this post doesn't mangle Matlab-esque syntax) were incorrect? If so, then you're being rude for insulting me rather than correcting me. If not, then you're being rude and ignorant for insulting me baselessly. I await your correction and/or your apology.

Everett wrote on May 8, 2007 9:42 AM:

This administration reminds me of condemned homes we used to tear down in my youth. Every dark place you expose to light, the roaches, snakes and various bugs would just scatter. It was not built on honesty. So what were continually finding out about it, is truly no surprise. America truly deserves better. When is enough enough. Our government is supposed to represent the integrity and wisdom of this country. The President doesn't read, cannot properly speak a sentence nor use most words in a sentence. If He is the DECIDER, why are we even having this conversation. This must stop. We must seriously impeach these people and move on. The joke has gone on much too long!

Anonymous wrote on May 8, 2007 4:25 PM:

Doesn’t Clarence Thomas have any kids?"

Umm...not that he knows of. But he does frequently watch porn and chase nappy headed hoes.

Did they do any genetic testing on Anita Hill's kids?

Posted by: Sevman
Date: May 7, 2007 05:22 PM

Sevman,

Take your vitriolic racist comments else where. They are not welcomed here.

Thomas wrote on May 9, 2007 12:28 AM:

Ugelow should have been fired for incompetence, if his comment here is any indication.

Just to be clear, because most people posting here are know-nothing mouth-breathing morons: the criminal section of the Civil Rights division is just one of several, and it may or may not be representative. To confuse the criminal section with the entire Civil Rights division, as several have done, is indicative of incredible stupidity.

uh huh whatevah wrote on May 19, 2007 8:43 AM:

the CRT has had a problem with minority retention for AGES. This is not a new problem.

kolya wrote on September 14, 2007 6:26 AM:

Hello! http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/horny-russian-teens.html horny russian teens [url=http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/horny-russian-teens.html]horny russian teens[/url] ass http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/nude-pre-teen.html nude pre teen nude pre teen [url=http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/nude-pre-teen.html nude pre teen]nude pre teen[/url] teens http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/trixie-teen-nude.html trixie teen nude trixie teen nude [url=http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/trixie-teen-nude.html trixie teen nude]trixie teen nude[/url]
http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/teen-models-nude.html teen models nude teen models nude [url=http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/teen-models-nude.html teen models nude]teen models nude[/url]
http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/teen-fashion-models.html teen fashion models teen fashion models [url=http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/teen-fashion-models.html teen fashion models]teen fashion models[/url]
http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/teen-people-magazine.html teen people magazine [url=http://teens.xanaxidea.cn/teen-people-magazine.html]teen people magazine[/url]

test wrote on November 9, 2007 7:00 AM:

test

epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 4:07 AM:

Hi all!
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
G'night