« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Dems Press Gonzales on Missouri USA
House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), along with subcommittee chair Linda Sanchez (D-CA) and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) wrote Alberto Gonzales today to press for details about the firing of U.S. Attorney for Kansas City Todd Graves and the subsequent hiring of Bradley Schlozman. They also took some time to point out that Gonzales' answers about Graves and Schlozman last week didn't hold up to scrutiny.
Gonzales testified, for example, that Gonzales had not mentioned Graves' firing before because his firing had been outside of the "process" -- that's despite the fact, the lawmakers, point out, that Graves was fired in exactly the same manner as the other eight U.S. attorneys (with a phone call from Justice Department official Michael Battle who assured the U.S. attorney that there was no particular reason he/she was being asked to step aside) only weeks after Graves' name appeared on Kyle Sampson's list of prosecutors to be fired.
And Gonzales was simply wrong, they write, when he argued that the Justice Department's lawsuit to purge Missouri's voter rolls, pushed by voter-fraud hawk Bradley Schlozman, was defeated mainly on jurisdictional grounds. On the contrary, they write, quoting portions of the judge's opinion against the Justice Deparment, the judge found that the suit was fundamentally flawed -- pointing out, for instance, that the Department had failed to show that any actual voter fraud had occurred as a result of ineligible voters being on the rolls.
Full text of the letter is below the fold.
The full letter:
Dear Mr. Attorney General:We are writing to formally restate Chairman Conyers' request at the end of your recent appearance before the House Judiciary Committee for the prompt production of all documents, in unredacted form, relating to the termination of Todd Graves, the former United States Attorney for the Western District of Missouri, who we now know was the ninth U.S. Attorney forced to resign by the Department in 2006.
This request would also cover all documents relevant to the selection of Brad Schlozman as the interim replacement for Mr. Graves, including documents regarding other candidates considered for this position, if any. As we understand it, this will require a new search by the Department of Justice, in addition to providing unredacted copies of already-produced proposed termination lists.
We also have concerns with your suggestion that Mr. Graves' termination was somehow not part of the same process that led to the other terminations, given the fact that Mr. Graves appeared on Kyle Sampson's proposed termination list that was transmitted to Harriet Miers in January 2006, just weeks before Mr. Graves was asked to resign.
As Representative Lofgren pointed out in her questioning, there are disturbing indications that the decision to fire Mr. Graves was related to his disagreement with a voter fraud lawsuit pushed by Mr. Schlozman, the very person eventually named by you to succeed Mr. Graves as an interim U.S. Attorney. Notwithstanding your assertions, our review indicates that the district court decision dismissing that lawsuit focused on much more than the procedural defect of naming the wrong defendant.
In addition to discussing whether the state of Missouri or local election authorities were proper defendants on some claims, Judge Laughrey also appears to have ruled directly on the merits of Missouri's own performance and whether or not the Government had produced any evidence of voter fraud. Among the Court's findings:
* "[T]he United States has not sustained its burden to show that the Defendants have violated the [National Voter Registration Act] mandate that Missouri 'conduct a general program' which makes a 'reasonable effort' to remove from voter registration lists the names of voters who have become ineligible by reason of death or change of residence."
* "[T]he current Secretary of State clearly made a reasonable effort to monitor [local election authorities] once the 2005 survey showed potential problems. In fact, the Secretary of State has done many of the things that the United States Government now seeks Court supervision to accomplish. Given the equitable nature of the relief requested by the United States, the Court declines to order the Secretary of State to do things which she is already doing voluntarily."
* "It is also telling that the United States has not shown that any Missouri resident was denied his or her right to vote as a result of deficiencies alleged by the United States. Nor has the United States shown that any voter fraud has occurred. Increased voter participation and elimination of fraud were the primary goals of Congress when it mandated that the States make reasonable efforts to maintain accurate voter registration lists. The absence of evidence of fraud or voter suppression during the relevant time period weighs heavily in favor of a finding that the Defendants' efforts have been reasonable."
* "Given the substantial efforts that were made by the State of Missouri, the lack of any evidence of bad faith, the difficulty that the Secretary of State faces when election authority is decentralized and the lack of any evidence that the remedies sought by the United States would have eliminated the problems which it has identified, the Court firmly concludes that the State of Missouri and the Secretary of State have made a reasonable effort to conduct a general program of voter list maintenance as required by the [National Voter Registration Act]."
Given these troubling circumstances, in addition to receiving the requested documents, we also request that you promptly explain your understanding of the facts regarding this termination and replacement, including but not limited to who placed Mr. Graves on the termination list and why, who was consulted on his termination and on his replacement by Mr. Schlozman, and who made the final decisions. In addition, please identify all current and former Department employees with information on this issue so that they may be interviewed, just as we have interviewed present and former Department personnel on the other eight terminations. Finally, please inform us whether any other United States Attorneys were terminated or asked to resign during President Bush's second term and, if so, who they were and the Department's basis for the termination or requested resignation.
Thank you in advance for your prompt cooperation.
Sincerely,
Chairman John Conyers, Jr., Rep. Linda Sanchez, Rep. Zoe Lofgren
Comments (29)
cds wrote on May 15, 2007 3:34 PM:OT - You guys are awesome. I feel like I'm taking a very intensive/advanced course in current events. Thank you.
jolly ranchero wrote on May 15, 2007 3:45 PM:OT--please note that Tony Gonzales just missed the dealine for the subpoena of Rove's emails. I would think this would be a big, big deal--the highest law man in the Nation ignoring a subpoena. Wow.
Odbasta wrote on May 15, 2007 3:47 PM:Doesn't anyone else think it's time to stop pussyfooting around, using quotes like, "Given these troubling circumstances", "We have concerns with your suggestion", or "there are disturbing indications"? Of course there are f-ing disturbing indications! Now actually DO something about it! No committee will get any new answers out of Gonzo until his ass is on the chopping block. That's their M.O...nobody's lives are important except their own. Only when they have one choice between ratting out their superiors or going to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison will the truth come out completely.
These committee hearings/letters/strong suggestions are quickly becoming a joke, and the people are taking notice that they're producing no results.
Steve5117 wrote on May 15, 2007 3:53 PM:Odbasta your wrong, things are just now getting warmed-up. I for one will enjoy watching the players squirm as they daily wonder what aspect of their scheme will come to light.
PJ White wrote on May 15, 2007 3:53 PM:Thanks again for all the info. The MSM has become so diluted and biased that anyone wishing to be truly informed has to search for the truth. You are one of the first places I come for unvarnished news, although I try to compare with other sites as well, including those with a conservative POV. Thank you for all your work on this issue. You have brought to the public eye and kept it there. It is so vitally important to recovering any semblence of justice in the US.
EH wrote on May 15, 2007 3:57 PM:Hey great, another letter for Gonzales to ignore!
Odbasta wrote on May 15, 2007 4:12 PM:EH: Precisely.
vox clamantis in red state wrote on May 15, 2007 4:25 PM:The Tragedy is that while we all keep ourselve entertained watching the AG ignore supeonas, make excuses, deny culpability, prisoners continue to be tortured and held for no good reason in faraway cells, and generals get fired by CBS for speaking out, and the sons of generals and mothers die in a war without end, to say nothing of those countless citizens being killed and shattered on their streets filled with chaos and darkness over there.
wilsom4 wrote on May 15, 2007 4:43 PM:While we will be force fed news of Falwell's death ad nauseum..
Impeach. Impeach now.
Thomas Simon wrote on May 15, 2007 4:53 PM:Ditto on THANK YOU - I also, after years of searching, have found TPM to be a site that keeps me grounded in real world truth sluthing.
Austin Cooper wrote on May 15, 2007 5:03 PM:" Doesn't anyone else think it's time to stop pussyfooting around, using quotes like ... 'there are disturbing indications'? "
The language is a bit like Congressional *Kabuki*: Forms Must Be Followed. They do honor to the Republic they're trying to save, even as we're all being dragged down a drain.
That said, if it wasn't a violation of law, I'd love to see CNN broadcasting tape of investigators going into Rove's office, cuffing him, removing his pants, taking his laptop and putting a black sack over his head with a yellow "Happy Face" painted on it (a la The Jerky Boys) before dragging him off to be booked for Contempt of Congress and the American People.
(sigh) Yeah, yeah; I know...
Code = bell, as in "Karl, ask not for whom..."
garzoid wrote on May 15, 2007 5:15 PM:Is it possible to get access to the republican political ads in the locations where the USA's worked to see to what extent they referred to ongoing voter fraud invesrtigations?
Rusty Austin wrote on May 15, 2007 5:20 PM:I love oversight. Anyone wants a free impeach bush bumpersticker today only, email me at info5@impeachbushbumperstickers.com and mention TPM.
Heh wrote on May 15, 2007 5:23 PM:anybody recall the term "slow burn"?
its what this is. Slowly, one by one, lets count 'em. Monica, Kyle, Comey, McNutty ;)I can't keep track.
The hardcore won't resign just the underlings, the ones holding up the heavyweights, the real scumbags.
Rusty Austin wrote on May 15, 2007 5:24 PM:I love oversight. Anyone wants a free impeach bush bumpersticker today, email me at info5@impeachbushbumperstickers.com and mention TPM.
tbhull wrote on May 15, 2007 5:25 PM:Congress forgot how to lead. At some point, which was reached a long time ago, fancy mind fuck letter writing is no longer effective leadership. Just impeach this idiot if you can (which I doubt they can) or push for an immediate no confidence vote for this guy. Also, cut off DOJ funding immediately until he resigns or is fired.
Ron Byers wrote on May 15, 2007 5:28 PM:Al Ranchero,
It's Al Gonzales. Tony Gonzales plays football.
Ron Byers wrote on May 15, 2007 5:29 PM:Al Ranchero,
It's Al Gonzales. Tony Gonzales plays football.
nolo wrote on May 15, 2007 6:35 PM:B R E A K I N G! —
senator patrick leahy to
subpoena bradley schlozman
on thursday, may 17, 2007!
when we put senator leahy’s statements
of this morning, together with thursday’s
senate judiciary committee executive
business meeting agenda. . . one may
easily surmise that by thursday, sen.
leahy plans to have a subpoena with mr.
schlozman’s name on it, ready for service.
i bet there will be action on
gonzales’ failure to comply with
rove e-mail subpoena return-date
of this afternoon, as well. . .
click my name to read all about it. . .
dhs wrote on May 15, 2007 6:47 PM:Good for Conyers, Sanchez, and Lofgren. Keep the pressure on. Hang tough. But keep in mind that a lot of people are going to be very angry with you in 2008 if you do not clinch this investigation, impeach Gonzales, and turn your findings over to a Special Prosecutor of the calibre of Patrick Fitzgerald.
You should also be giving serious consideration to Dennis Kucinich's articles of impeachment, and to laying the ground work for impeaching the President. There are grounds for impeachment for both Bush and Cheney.
The hearings of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees will go down in history as a turning point one way or another. A fundamental tenet of the United States political system is the principle of checks and balances. Your committee is a dramatic illustration of that principle in action. Don't blow it.
Buck wrote on May 15, 2007 7:15 PM:Karl got his terminology right, just on the wrong subject:
Slow bleed.
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 7:30 PM:I'm curious as to why Gonzo would risk pissing off McNulty in that speech he gave today, basically putting it all on McNulty. I wonder if they've pegged McNulty as a source of leaks or something and decided to go after him. Just a weird thing to do to risk pissing him off I would think. Gonzo can't be that stupid. Then again.......
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 8:49 PM:I just want to run a thought that I had. I don't know if this would work, but it popped into my head and I need to work through it. Is it possible that the administration want to piss off McNulty and chase him from office as quickly as possible? I believe that his resignation stated that he would stay for several more months unless a new nominee was confirmed. Can they make a recess appointment if he is still in office? Perhaps the administration wants the position vacant so as to make a recess appointment. Just a thought that I need to hash out.
bcg wrote on May 15, 2007 10:10 PM:An impeachment at this point would be premature, as in 'ejaculation' -- all the pleasure would be on one side, but the job wouldn't be done properly. The investigation has to go until they've got the cases to bring indictments against the underlings in the hope that one of them will turn. When they turn a player, then they'll be able to open the higher levels of the conspiracy (all those people who were deciding who should be fired when no conclusions were being reached at the DoJ.)
bajajazz wrote on May 15, 2007 11:48 PM:At least I hope that's the way it is and put my faith in patience and the experience of the Democratic legislators.
I, too, am fed up with pussyfooting language. We are dealing with lowclass barroom scum and it's time to start talking to them in the most direct and pungent terms imaginable. Enough of this "comity" nonsense, call the lying bastards out for what they are and dare to use the threat of impeachment if any more subpoenas are ignored.
code=pain: jesus, I'll say
Slippery Slope wrote on May 16, 2007 12:52 AM:Can they make a recess appointment if he is still in office? Perhaps the administration wants the position vacant so as to make a recess appointment. Just a thought that I need to hash out.
Posted by:
Date: May 15, 2007 08:49 PM
************************************
Wow, this would be too funny if this where in some high drama TV show, but sadly it is not.
Could it be, as you may be driving at, that McNulty specifically worded his resignation having prior knowledge or suspected what the WH might try? Does McNulty’s delayed departure come from some sense of decency to figuratively place his [middle] finger in the leaky constitutional dam?
Seems that the WH and Gonzo better tap McNulty’s phone. Who knows who he’s talking to. He may be gumming them to death [prison].
lawman wrote on May 16, 2007 1:02 AM:somebody needs to look into departure of US Atty from Iowa and his replacement by Matt Dummermuth, the Civil Rights Division pal of Schloz. A political appointee,Dummermuth did much of the gateway interviewing of applicants for the Civil Rights Division.
cooldaddyo wrote on May 16, 2007 3:18 AM:So the A.G. would like to claim that the voter fraud case was dismissed mainly on "jurisdictional grounds."
Let's assume, rather generously, that he is right. If so, this is tantamount to saying that the Justice Department Division in charge of enforcing voter right DOES NOT KNOW which court to bring a voter fraud case in.
So either (a) he is intentionally obfuscating to cover the lack of merit, or (b) they all failed 1st Year Civil Procedure at Regent University School of Law.
The first thing a good attorney does when there is claim is to ask what is the shortest possible statute of limitation that could affect this claim? The next is to find out the proper court in which to file before that time expires.
This is not rocket science, and I have to conclude he is once again hoping to convince people that they are just incompetent; the truth is that they are guilty of intentional misconduct in violation their ethical duty as lawyers (which has no relation to their legal duties) and should be sanction by the state and/or federal bar under which they are licensed. I won't hold my breath.
crack wrote on May 16, 2007 9:53 AM:Again, Todd Graves is brother of Sam Graves (R-MO-6). Is there anyway someone can get Sam to come lay some wood in his brother's defense? Maybe they aren't close.