TPMmuckraker | Talking Points Memo | DoJ Purge Figure Resigns

DoJ Purge Figure Resigns

By Paul Kiel - June 15, 2007, 5:30PM

Nothing like a Friday afternoon resignation to end the week.

A senior Justice Department official who helped carry out the firings of eight U.S. attorneys said Friday he is resigning.
Mike Elston, chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, is the fifth Justice official to leave after being linked to the dismissals of the prosecutors.

The firings have led to congressional investigations, an internal Justice Department inquiry and calls on Capitol Hill for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Elston's resignation is effective at the end of next week. Reached Friday afternoon, he confirmed his plans to leave but would not say why....

Other aides who have resigned in the wake of the firings include former Gonzales chief of staff Kyle Sampson and White House liaison Monica M. Goodling. A fifth official, Mike Battle, who ran the Justice office that oversees the U.S. attorneys, left in March.

Update: Some highlights from Elston's tenure at DoJ:

-- He allegedly called three of the fired U.S. attorneys and made an implicit threat that the Justice Department would detail the reasons for their firings if they didn't stay quiet.

-- He allegedly rejected a large number of applicants to Justice Department positions because they were Democrats.

-- When Carol Lam, the former U.S. attorney for San Diego, asked to stay on the job longer in order to deal with some outstanding prosecutions (the expanding Duke Cunningham case among them), Elston told her not to think about her cases, that she should be gone in "weeks, not months" and said "these instructions were 'coming from the very highest levels of the government.'"

-- He called around to the U.S. attorneys whom he had placed on one of the draft firing lists to apologize when he discovered that his list would be turned over to Congress.

Comments (81)

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 5:42 PM:

Do you think he saw the handwriting on the wall?

daveminnj wrote on June 15, 2007 5:43 PM:

to spend more time with his Family?

dumbstruck wrote on June 15, 2007 5:46 PM:

...and checking into rehab soon?

bart wrote on June 15, 2007 5:53 PM:

...to pursue opportunities in the private sector?

Anonymous wrote on June 15, 2007 5:55 PM:

Better than a doc dump! But not quite a Saturday Night Massacre...

I think he wants to spend more time with Scooter Libby's family.

The upside is that he can now be subpoenaed to testify (again) (and again) without needing the AG's authorization! I eagerly await the publication of his 'clarifications'!

Pete In TX wrote on June 15, 2007 5:55 PM:

possibly be named Chief Internal Investigator to look into the Firings....., you know what I mean,
only DOJ can know what they are looking for-

Fred C. Dobbs wrote on June 15, 2007 5:56 PM:

To join the Thompson campaign?

jeffgee wrote on June 15, 2007 5:58 PM:

Which Thompson?

CanuckinPR wrote on June 15, 2007 5:58 PM:

Handwriting on the wall...Icy cold water lapping at his ankles, deck chairs being shuffled around behind him and a slow moving train wreck headed his way???
Yup!...time to spend more time with the(SC=)goat...er Family!

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 6:00 PM:

What a difference a year makes. Last year Elston received THE JOHN MARSHALL AWARD:

The John Marshall Awards are the Department’s highest awards offered to attorneys, for contributions and excellence in specialized areas of legal performance. Twelve awards in eight category awards will be presented this year. Each award is accompanied by a cash award of $2,000 per recipient for Federal employees.

PROVIDING LEGAL ADVICE AWARD: Leadership and legal advice related to significant appellate cases RECIPIENT: Michael J. Elston Chief of Staff and Counselor Office of the Deputy Attorney General

internetjoe wrote on June 15, 2007 6:02 PM:

Thus taking another plate off the table of the investigation banquet.

And still no outside email course.

bp wrote on June 15, 2007 6:11 PM:

Another prevaricator having his comeuppance. What a sad and dishonest lot are these folks at the Department of Justice. Did I say Justice? I mean the Department of Justice as dictated by the Decider. Sad indeed.

Orwell's Intuition wrote on June 15, 2007 6:12 PM:

He can start practicing his "I don't recall," "I don't remember," "I knew once but I must have forgotten" lines for his shining moment in the sun before Congress.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Code word, nation, as in still perhaps too late to save this nation.

johnnydoughey wrote on June 15, 2007 6:12 PM:

My only hope is that congress will do something to insure this will not happen again next year... so far, the only winners in this game have been the perpetraitors...

bp wrote on June 15, 2007 6:12 PM:

EH wrote on June 15, 2007 6:13 PM:

All of the Attorney resignations were completely proper. Nothing to see here!

Candyce wrote on June 15, 2007 6:23 PM:

For a bunch of "nothing improper" there sure are a lot of resignations.

allan_in_upstate wrote on June 15, 2007 6:23 PM:

Would the last person leaving the Department of Justice please turn off the lights? And the wiretaps? Thanks.

JusticeForall wrote on June 15, 2007 6:24 PM:

Glad to see this swine depart. I hope they get him under oath and on the hot seat first. Im sure he too is infected with the Memory loss disease that seems to be epedemic amongst these criminals. I wonder if he will cry like a baby like his pal Griffin. These dolty dough boys are enormous wimps, seems every day we have another Rethug bawling his eyes out.
Who is left at DOJ to run the shop? I hope and pray it is the "career" employees once again, how they can function with that scum Gonzo still at the helm I can't imagine. They have had to cope with these idiots running DOJ into the ground and watch as they destroy it. The ones that managed to hang on and are still there are true American heros and represent what REAL public servants are all about. I hope they can see a light at the end of this mess and the DOJ can be resurrected into the honorable institution it once was.
Elston deserves everything he gets, I hope he gets a substantial amount of time behind bars.

END FAITH BASED INITIATIVES!

varney wrote on June 15, 2007 6:24 PM:

Maybe I'm over-suspicious, but isn't the AP sudden in referring to him as "Mike" instead of "Michael"? Could it be that they're hoping that fewer google alerts (usually for "Michael Elston") pick up the news?

cevrero wrote on June 15, 2007 6:26 PM:

Enough of this "uniting the american people" administration,....we need someone to divide us where we need it most....our ego.

linda wrote on June 15, 2007 6:28 PM:

good god, is there nothing bush won't debase.

Anonymous wrote on June 15, 2007 6:32 PM:

USG ATTY RESIGNATIONS IN LIGHT OF DC BAR RULES AND AUDIT SCOPE INCREASE, AICPA

Oooh, a resignation: Wow, does this have anything to do with DC Bar Rule 1.16 and 1.6; and any plans to request immunity to testify before Congress like Goodling did?

"a lawyer shall _not represent_ a client or, where representation has commenced, _shall withdraw_ from the representation of a client if: (1) the representation will result in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct _or other law_"
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/aba/current/ABA_CODE.HTM#Rule_1.16

-When is counsel going to reveal the information related to the alleged war crimes, FISA violations, and other alleged illegal activity connected with this resignation?

- What evidence can counsel with DoJ, OMB, EOP, OVP, and outside counsel provide to show they have fully complied with the DC Bar rules?

- What evidence does counsel have that memoranda were created to support imposing bodily harm; and how did this resignation relate to the use or threatened use of any bodily harm in re US Atty firings?

- Is counsel aware of any private legal action not to advance a legitimate legal claim, but to retaliate against GOP counsel providing evidence to the grand jury?

- What is the plan of counsel to respond, if at all, to the allegations that their association with the DOJ has illegally permitted war crimes, Constitutional violations, and grave breaches of Geneva; and that this conduct was fatally documented in memoranda to the US Attys through the RNC e-mails; and the US Atty e-mails are relevant to war crimes prosecutors?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/aba/current/ABA_CODE.HTM#Rule_1.16

==============

Has DoJ IG, Congress, and the DOJ OPR increased audit scope _again_ in re Statement on Accounting standard 99, mandating an increase in audit scope with personnel changes, resignations, and staff turnovers?

Time for Congress to get in writing a memo from the DOJ IG, auditors, and others who do internal controls for the DoJ contractors to explain what is going on, has audit scope been increased; if not, what the plan is of the agency head to provide an exception report to "not increase" audit scope despite the Generally Accepted Government Accounting Standards [GAGAS] which use SAS99.

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 6:42 PM:

He's back...the unknown wind bag.

Karen Johnson wrote on June 15, 2007 6:44 PM:

Lam got work really quickly! Rumor is it is with a huge law firm with a decidedly "red" tone. Wish someone would look into that! Josh, you in?

Tennessean wrote on June 15, 2007 6:44 PM:

Good riddance to bad rubbish...

gregor wrote on June 15, 2007 6:49 PM:

Lam got a job at Qualcomm in San Diego. I thought Irwin Jacobs, the billionnaire founder, was a democrat. At least his charitable contributions are to decidedly liberal causes (e.g. to the School of Engineering at UCSD, a public university, and not to some staid elitist Ivy League ).

Brownie wrote on June 15, 2007 6:50 PM:

Heck of a job, Mikey!

Mike wrote on June 15, 2007 7:03 PM:

Sounds like a real bully, cowardly political hack. I'd say good riddance and well-deserved, but I suspect he has a cozy Wingnut Welfare position lined up.

Karen Johnson wrote on June 15, 2007 7:07 PM:

I heard of at least one case that seemed interesting. I would have to follow up on that. (Seemed interesting since in the case of Chiara, it seems strings may have been pulled, wondering if the same goes for Lam?) What do you think?

Woodhall Hollow wrote on June 15, 2007 7:09 PM:

What with all the resignations of all the main underlings, who the hell is going to run the DoJ, now?

Caligirl wrote on June 15, 2007 7:13 PM:

With all that isz wrong with this DOJ, and so much scrutiny now, why are they screaming 'voter fraud' in North Carolina with seemingly no one trying to stop them?
http://www.charlotte.com/politics/story/160851.html

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 7:14 PM:

Maybe some of the little people, those who thought they were hot shit controlling everything, perhaps one of them has realized that it is time to cut their losses and seek a new direction in life.

Surely some man or woman who was hired because he or she had the right credentials is realizing how precarious their position is now and senses the necessity to abandon this sinking ship of state. I would be very tempted to come forward if I was in that position, and the sooner the better.

bfredr wrote on June 15, 2007 7:17 PM:

I am looking at this wrong? Does anyone else think there is a problem with an organization that has a Chief of Staff to the Deputy....
If more enployees were actually working maybe there wouldn't be time for such crap.

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 7:19 PM:

I wonder if FEMA has a church-trailer sitting around waiting for the next emergency, Congress could set up a confessional in front of DoJ, sorta like the bloodmobile.

the truth will out wrote on June 15, 2007 7:21 PM:

Do they all get special shots of something to make their faces puffy like karl? Honestly, you have to wonder...

Johnsnottoodistracted wrote on June 15, 2007 7:42 PM:

Do you think everyone knows what is happening except the press?

The Oracle wrote on June 15, 2007 7:47 PM:

Maybe he and Scooter Libby can share the same jail cell?

In a related case (heard on the Rachel Maddow Air America radio program today), the five Catholics on the U.S. Supreme Court just ruled that is okay for judges to lie.

Nope, you heard me right. In a case involving a judge "misinforming" a defendant and his attorney about when the last day an appeal could be filed, thus causing the appeal to be filed after the real deadline, but before the date the judge gave, the five Supreme Court Catholics said tough luck to the defendant who's facing life in prison.

But in my view the real issue is that the judge in this case literally lied to the defendant and his attorney in this case, and it doesn't matter if was intentional, unintentional, or just a sign of judicial incompetence. What this judge did was lie, and now five Supreme Court Catholics, who supposedly don't believe lying is a good (or Christian) thing, have ruled that judges (including themselves???) can lie, lie, lie...without being held accountable.

But then again, these five Supreme Court Catholics have thrown their "fair and impartial" federal bench position behind the biggest liar in the history of our democracy, George W. Bush.

Therefore, based on their own righteous, rigid religious beliefs, and a certain biblical prohibition against lying, these five Supreme Court Catholics have sealed their fate and can all start packing their bags (asbestos, I presume) for their stay in hell. Bye bye, Roberts. Bye bye, Scalia. Bye bye, Alito. Bye bye, Thomas. Bye bye, Kennedy. Say hello to Satan, boys.

SC: Clean...as in that it is going to take a whole lot of industrial strength cleanser to clean up our democracy and purge all the "culture of corruption" Republicans from positions of "public trust," corrupt Republicans who have solidly embraced lying, in place of truth, justice and the American way.

John Wilson wrote on June 15, 2007 7:54 PM:

Have we become so rich, fat, lazy, stupid, uneducated, and unmindful that the Government(s)
is/are correct is appraising the public as
Ignorant sheep?

And is this just another way that civilizations
perish?

I make no pretense of being an economist,
but I'm beginning to change my mind concerning the
doctrine of 'starve the beast'...

Starve the beast! Thin the herd...root, hog, or die!

I mean our government(s) must have SOME plan...:-)

----
(I love TPM :-)

EH wrote on June 15, 2007 7:55 PM:

Turn on the lights and the rats scurry like mice.

Mike Valentine wrote on June 15, 2007 7:58 PM:

At the pleasure of the President .........

I wonder what keeps Connie in her job?

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 8:06 PM:

Given what we know about Gonzales and the DoJ I really don't see anything wrong in letting the DoJ's work slow to a snails pace. The prevention of them screwing over innocent people will probably be worth postponing real crime prosecution.

Steve5117 wrote on June 15, 2007 8:14 PM:

I saw the SC of hope and had to share my hope that stem cell research may one day discover the gene responsible for the brain malfunction prevalent in so many members of this administration.

dixiegrl wrote on June 15, 2007 8:31 PM:

voice of san Diego.org reports Carol Lam was hired by Qualcomm.
Qualcomm press release:

QUALCOMM Appoints Carol C. Lam Senior Vice President and Legal Counsel for Company’s Legal Team
Former United States Attorney Brings More than 20 Years of Proven Legal Expertise, Litigation Success and Leadership to the Position
SAN DIEGO — February 15, 2007 — QUALCOMM Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM), a leading developer and innovator of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA ) and other advanced wireless technologies, today announced the appointment of former United States Attorney Carol C. Lam to the position of senior vice president and legal counsel. Working with QUALCOMM's existing legal team, she will help manage and direct the Company's litigation worldwide.

“Carol's groundbreaking work in complex cases has earned her a national reputation as one of the top prosecutors in the country,” said Louis Lupin, executive vice president and general counsel for QUALCOMM. “After more than two decades of outstanding public service, she is widely respected for her wisdom, judgment, integrity and courage. Carol's success and experience in managing complex litigation and large legal teams will be instrumental in shaping and managing QUALCOMM's considerable worldwide litigation.”

conniptionfit wrote on June 15, 2007 8:35 PM:

All the little rats jumping ship when they realize that they've poisoned the DOJ, and it's beginning to look like only incompetant, partisan boobs are still working at the DOJ...

Mark Richards wrote on June 15, 2007 8:38 PM:

No loss.

Anonymous wrote on June 15, 2007 8:43 PM:

>>QUALCOMM Appoints Carol C. Lam Senior Vice
>>President and Legal Counsel for Company’s Legal
>>Team

Qualcomm just lost my business.

Anonymous wrote on June 15, 2007 9:16 PM:

Speaking of AG issue, did anyone else catch
Bush's comment, when he was in Albania, about the then pending No Confidence vote?
He said..
"They can have their votes of no-confidence but it's not going to make the determination about who serves in my government."

HIS Government?????

Far cry from Lincoln's description of a government BY the People. FOR the People.

Even The Queen says "Our Government", I believe.

Sheesh............

Anonymous wrote on June 15, 2007 10:21 PM:

Elston is getting out before it gets too hot. He's probably wondering what he would look like wearing a cast.

Bali Sue wrote on June 15, 2007 10:22 PM:

Qualcomm's gain is our country's loss. For sure, they will appreciate and reward her talents many times over. Much more than can be said for our inJustice Dept.

JNagarya wrote on June 15, 2007 10:33 PM:

He can start practicing his "I don't recall," "I don't remember," "I knew once but I must have forgotten" lines for his shining moment in the sun before Congress.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Code word, nation, as in still perhaps too late to save this nation.

Posted by: Orwell's Intuition
Date: June 15, 2007 06:12 PM

He can't use those explanations because there is always a relatively limited supply per year, and Gonzales used all that were available.

G. Hall wrote on June 15, 2007 10:34 PM:

Make no mistake: Mike Elston was not much more than Paul McNulty's biggest judgment error. Far worse if he'd been less obviously in over his head; under other circumstances, he might've continued trying to intimidate both career and political appointees at Justice (even at the senior ADAG level) for months to come.

JNagarya wrote on June 15, 2007 10:36 PM:

>>QUALCOMM Appoints Carol C. Lam Senior Vice
>>President and Legal Counsel for Company’s Legal
>>Team

Qualcomm just lost my business.

Posted by:
Date: June 15, 2007 08:43 PM

Lam pt "Duke" Cunningham in jail, and was beginning the prosecutions of those who bried him, and other investigating other corrupt Republicans when fired.

And if you read her responses to the questions from the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, you learn she is a pro.

The loss is ours.

JNagarya wrote on June 15, 2007 10:47 PM:

""a lawyer shall _not represent_ a client or, where representation has commenced, _shall withdraw_ from the representation of a client if: (1) the representation will result in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct _or other law_"
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/aba/current/ABA_CODE.HTM#Rule_1.16"

Have you read any of the Bar's advisory opinions or findings on the interpretation and application of that Canon? No, you haven't.

Have you shown any violation of that Canon? No, you have not.

"-When is counsel going to reveal the information related to the alleged war crimes, FISA violations, and other alleged illegal activity connected with this resignation?"

Does Elston know anyhthing about those alleged crimes? You don't know, do you? And if he doesn't?

"- What evidence can counsel with DoJ, OMB, EOP, OVP, and outside counsel provide to show they have fully complied with the DC Bar rules?"

You're an ass. One cannot prove a negative.

"- What evidence does counsel have that memoranda were created to support imposing bodily harm; and how did this resignation relate to the use or threatened use of any bodily harm in re US Atty firings?"

Have you any information that Elston was involved in any of that? No, you have not.

And get it through your head, ass: you impress no one beyond yourself with your pseudo-law and questions unproven as to rlevance.

You're a blowhard. And a twit who's afraid to identify himself. And yet you expect to be viewed as credible!?

Your rants are off-topic and obnoxious.

And you don't know what you're talking about.

"Posted by:
Date: June 15, 2007 06:32 PM"

theWalrus wrote on June 15, 2007 10:53 PM:

"Elston said he was leaving to join a law firm in the Washington area..."

So, no punishment for what he did. That sets a good example, huh? At this rate Congress approval rating will be in the low teens by neext election.

JNagarya wrote on June 15, 2007 11:26 PM:

Posted by: Caligirl
Date: June 15, 2007 07:13 PM

Read the full article: look at the party of the state source through whom the phony allegations are being passed. And the party of the state officials who are stopping the fraud.

If you think Congress doesn't know of that and other efforts like it, then you are dumb. Congress knows more than we know, and Congress doesn't reveal all it knows in order not to jeopardize ongoing investigations.

The vast majority of people, in and out of gov't, are not corrupt.

Those in gov't who are corrupt are _elected from among ourselves_.

The gov't isn't some separate, foreign, distant entity. The gov't is _We the people_.

Sgt. Randolph Mantooth, Man of Action wrote on June 16, 2007 12:10 AM:

Instead of spending time in jail he gets to make tons of money at a ritzy DC law firm- yeah, he's really screwed.
Security Code: screw (no kidding, that's really the code word)

Ken wrote on June 16, 2007 2:30 AM:

> I really don't see anything wrong in letting
> the DoJ's work slow to a snails pace. The
> prevention of them screwing over innocent
> people will probably be worth postponing
> real crime prosecution.

Except that it is actually the DOJ's job to prevent *other* parts of the government (often states) from screwing over innocent people (e.g. by passing voter ID laws). They took this one from the mafia playbook--if you really want to get away with crimes you have to corrupt the police.

Steve5117 wrote on June 16, 2007 5:30 AM:

Ken
Date: June 16, 2007 02:30 AM

You made my point Ken.

It is the DoJ's job to stop states from disenfranchising voters, but this DoJ has pushed states to enact laws that do the opposite.

The more people who resign, means fewer people to do the dirty deeds at this point. I imagine that much time is being spent by those still there trying to cover their tails and work on their own defence strategy. That's OK because that is lees time spent trying to screw over the American people.

tbhull wrote on June 16, 2007 9:01 AM:

Another young balding double chinned white guy. The administration is being overtaken by Rove clones.

JEP wrote on June 16, 2007 10:00 AM:

JNagayra;

now I am beginning to think you actually ARE just a subtle provocatuer. You may be right sometimes, I tend to agree with your po=sitions, but your debating skills land somewhere between all-star wrestling and Monty Python... you don't present your reasonable argument in a way anyone wants to believe, you are much too reactionary and your vernacular borders on the compulsively insulting...mellow out bud, you can tell people they are wrong without telling them they are scum... You are starting to sound like a left-wing version of a Rush Limbaugh absolutist...

Chill.

Argue; don't spit insults, if you are really right you don't need to offend anyone, and you will convince many more people of your case.

Anonymous wrote on June 16, 2007 11:08 AM:

Figure out which neo-cons don't have secret service protection and break their noses! Unsavory indeed, but they have and will repeatedly exploit the unwashed masses for their elite agenda.

Slippery Slope wrote on June 16, 2007 11:32 AM:

Figure out which neo-cons don't have secret service protection and break their noses! Unsavory indeed, but they have and will repeatedly exploit the unwashed masses for their elite agenda.

Posted by:
Date: June 16, 2007 11:08 AM
*********************************
NO!

Find out the laws they broke through legal means and put their ass in jail!

And for your threats of violance, do the same.

Bobby Hill wrote on June 16, 2007 12:40 PM: