David Iglesias

Watch: Maddow Interviews Iglesias On GOP's Anti-ACORN Campaign

Zachary Roth | September 29, 2009, 11:39AM

One point that often gets overlooked in the current freak-out over ACORN, is that the US attorney firings were, in part, a different manifestation of the same Republican-driven campaign to discredit and sideline the group that we've seen recently.

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow last night interviewed David Iglesias, and reminded us that Iglesias was fired in large part for not pursuing bogus voter fraud cases tied to ACORN. The New Mexico GOP, along with Karl Rove, understood that hampering the registration of poor and minority voters was crucial to boosting Republicans' chances in the minority-heavy state. And that pressuring law enforcement to bring voter fraud cases implicating ACORN, despite the lack of evidence, was the best way to do it.

Read more »

David Iglesias

Iglesias: "I Feel One Hundred Percent Vindicated"

Zachary Roth | August 13, 2009, 10:05AM

David Iglesias has reacted with a combination of satisfaction and indignation to this week's release of documents on the U.S. attorney firings.

"I feel 100 percent vindicated," Iglesias, the former U.S. attorney for New Mexico, whose dismissal was the most controversial of the bunch, told TPMmuckraker in an interview.

Read more »

David Iglesias

Rove Aide Longed to Replace Iglesias With GOP Lawyer Who Helped Get Him Fired

Zachary Roth | August 12, 2009, 11:25AM

After firing David Iglesias as U.S. attorney for New Mexico, Karl Rove's top aide longed to replace him with a Republican party activist who had helped agitate for the firing in the first place, newly released documents reveal.

In early January 2007, several weeks after the firings had been carried out, the Albuquerque Journal reported, based on a press release from New Mexico senator Pete Domenici, that there were four leading candidates for the newly vacant post.

Read more »

David Iglesias

Docs Belie Rove's Claim That His Aide Was "Freelancing" In Pushing For Iglesias Firing

Zachary Roth | August 11, 2009, 3:35PM

This won't come as a shock ... but the just released documents on the U.S. attorney firings make it clear that Karl Rove was far from straight with the House committee that interviewed him last month.

According to the transcript of the interview, Rove said that his top aide, Scott Jennings, was "freelancing" in trying to get David Iglesias fired in the summer of 2005. Rove told his interviewers that Jennings "had strong feelings about Iglesias" after having done political work in New Mexico.

Read more »

Karl Rove

Docs Show Rove Pushed For Iglesias Firing

Zachary Roth | August 11, 2009, 3:20PM

Perhaps the key takeaway from the just released documents on the U.S. attorney firings is this:

Karl Rove claimed recently that he and his staff acted merely as a conduit for passing on concerns about David Iglesias. But it's now clear that Rove's office pushed from 2005 for Iglesias to be canned, and was intimately involved in the decision.

Read more »

Karl Rove

'Very Agitated' Rove Called Miers From New Mexico To Complain About Iglesias

Justin Elliott | August 11, 2009, 3:12PM

We're digging through the trove of documents released today by the House Judiciary Committee on the US attorney firings and the politicization of the Justice Department under George W. Bush.

In a June 15 interview with House investigators, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers detailed a remarkable 2006 contact with Karl Rove, then on the road in New Mexico, regarding US Attorney David Iglesias.

Rove, Miers recalled, was "very agitated" about Iglesias, who was later ousted in the Bush Administration's purge of US Attorneys. Rove was getting "barraged" with complains by "political people that were active in New Mexico."

Read more »

David Iglesias

Rove Aide: "I Would Really Like To Move Forward With Getting Rid Of" Iglesias

Zachary Roth | August 11, 2009, 2:58PM

Here are two quick juicy parts from the just-released documents on the U.S. attorney firings, about the decision to fire David Igleisas of New Mexico -- as flagged in a House Judiciary committee press release:

• 2005 White House "Decision" to fire David Iglesias - It has previously been known that New Mexico Republicans pressed for Iglesias to be removed because they did not like his decisions on vote fraud cases. New White House documents show that Rove and his office were involved in this effort no later than May 2005 (months earlier than previously known) - for example, in May and June 2005, Rove aide Scott Jennings sent emails to Tim Griffin (also in Rove's office) asking "what else I can do to move this process forward" and stressing that "I would really like to move forward with getting rid of NM US ATTY." In June 2005, Harriet Miers emailed that a "decision" had been made to replace Iglesias. At this time, DOJ gave Iglesias top rankings, so this decision was clearly not just the result of the White House following the Department's lead as Rove and Miers have maintained.

• Iglesias criticized by Rove aide for not "doing his job on" Democratic Congressional Candidate Patricia Madrid - An October 2006 email chain begun by Representative Heather Wilson criticized David Iglesias for not bringing politically useful public corruption prosecutions in the run up to the 2006 elections. Scott Jennings forwarded Wilson's email to Karl Rove and complained that Iglesias had been "shy about doing his job on Madrid," Wilson's opponent in the 2006 Congressional race. Just weeks after this email, Iglesias' name was placed on the final firing list.

David Iglesias

Iglesias: Make Rove Testimony Public ASAP

Zachary Roth | March 5, 2009, 8:49AM

David Iglesias has responded to the news of a deal to secure Karl Rove and Harriet Miers' testimony about the firings of Iglesias and seven other US Attorneys.

In a statement to TPMmuckraker, Iglesias, whose firing as US Attorney for the district of New Mexico was deemed the "most troubling" by a Justice Department report released last year, said:

Today's agreement represents true progress in this matter which has been on-going for over two years. I trust that the initial private testimony of Mr. Rove and Ms. Miers will become public at the soonest possible date.

Justice Department

Domenici Subpoenaed In US Attorneys Probe

Zachary Roth | February 12, 2009, 9:02AM

Last week, TPMmuckraker reported that the investigation by prosecutor Nora Dannehy into the US Attorney firings was focusing on Pete Domenici.

And today, the Washington Post reports that Dannehy has issued a subpoena to the former New Mexico Republican senator.

The Post adds that Dannehy will interview Scott Jennings, who was a top White House deputy to Karl Rove, as early as today. Jennings' lawyer told the paper he will "cooperate to the best of his ability" and is not a target in the case.

A report by the Justice Department's inspector general found that Domenici several times complained to Bush administration officials about David Iglesias, then the US Attorney for New Mexico. Domenici wanted Iglesias to quicken the pace of prosecutions against Democratic office-holders in the state. The report concluded that Iglesias had been fired for political reasons*.

The report also recommended appointing a prosecutor to look into possible crimes in connection with the firings, and the Justice Department named Dannehy for that role.

* This paragraph has been corrected from an earlier version.

David Iglesias

U.S. Attorney Scandal: Feds Probe Domenici for Obstruction of Justice In Iglesias Firing

Murray Waas | February 4, 2009, 5:14PM

A federal grand jury probe of the firings of nine U.S. attorneys during the Bush administration is focusing on the role played by recently retired Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) and former senior Bush White House aides in the 2006 dismissal of David Iglesias as U.S. attorney for New Mexico, according to legal sources familiar with the inquiry.

The federal grand jury is investigating whether Domenici and other political figures attempted to improperly press Iglesias to bring a criminal prosecution against New Mexico Democrats just prior to the 2006 congressional midterm elections, according to legal sources close to the investigation and private attorneys representing officials who prosecutors want to question.  Investigators appear to be scrutinizing Iglesias' firing in the context of whether he was fired in retaliation because Domenici and others believed that he would not manipulate the timing of prosecutions to help Republicans.

Previously, Domenici was severely criticized by two internal Justice Department watchdog offices, the Department's Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), for refusing to cooperate with their earlier probe of the firings of the U.S. attorneys. In part because of their frustration that Domenici and his chief of staff, Steve Bell, as well as several senior White House officials, would not cooperate with them, the Inspector General and OPR sought that a criminal prosecutor take over their probe. It is unclear whether Domenici will now cooperate with the criminal probe. Domenici's attorney, Lee Blalack, in an interview, declined to say what Domenici will do when he is contacted by investigators.

The focus of the grand jury probe was described by a federal law enforcement official, two witnesses who have been recently been asked to answer questions from investigators, and an attorney representing a former Justice Department official who has been told that investigators want to question his client.  People who had been contacted by investigators spoke on the condition that they not be named because they did not want to upset federal law enforcement officials who would question and investigate them and also because they believe that simply being questioned might unfairly tarnish their reputations.

The grand jury investigation is currently being led by Nora Dannehy, the acting U.S. attorney in Connecticut.  Then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey named Dannehy to "determine whether any prosecutable offense was committed" in the course of the firings following September's report by the Inspector General and OPR on the firings.

The report found that Iglesias was fired largely as a result of complaints made to the White House by Domenici and Bell. But the report also concluded that the probe was severely "hindered" by the refusal by Domenici, Bell, and several senior Bush administration officials to cooperate with the investigation. 

Read more »

David Iglesias

Iglesias' New Gig Came Through Military, Not Bush Administration

Zachary Roth | January 21, 2009, 3:39PM

When we learned that David Iglesias -- one of the US Attorneys purged by the Bush administration for political reasons -- is going to be prosecuting Guantanamo detainees as a member of the Navy JAG corps, it struck us that he appeared to have been on the job for a little while. That would suggest he was tapped for the assignment by the Bushies -- which would be ironic given his past.

Turns out that's not exactly the case. Iglesias told TPMmuckraker that he had responded to an email sent out by the Navy JAG corps, looking for prosecutors for the assignment. His application was eventually approved, he said, by that office and by the Office of Military Commissions, which is run by Susan Crawford -- the retired general who last week told the Washington Post unequivocally that we tortured Mohammed al- Qahtani, a Gitmo detainee.

In other words, it appears that it was the uniformed military, rather than the civilian DOD, that brought Iglesias on board.

As for the value of his new work, Iglesias said: "It's important for people to have confidence in what's going on, in light of all the problems the office has had over the years" -- which have included allegations of rigged prosecutions.

And he called the new leadership under Defense Secretary Bob Gates "fantastic," adding "they get it."

David Iglesias

Fired US Attorney To Prosecute Gitmo Cases

Zachary Roth | January 21, 2009, 11:25AM

David Iglesias -- the former US Attorney who was fired in 2006 for failing to prosecute politically motivated cases as aggressively as the Bush administration and its allies wanted -- has a new job.

Iglesias, a member of the US Naval Reserve JAG corps, has been reactivated as part of a special prosecution team for Guantanamo detainees, he told a New Mexico news station this morning.

"One hundred percent of what I'm doing is prosecuting terrorist cases out of Guantanamo," he said.

Igleisas explained that he had already begun the work, having travelled to the facility once, and expecting to go back.

"It's the most significant set of orders I've had in my 24 years of navy service," he added. "The level of detail that I'm looking into some of these terrorist groups, it just takes my breath away."

And he signaled what seemed to be a change in tone from the Bush years. "We want to make sure that those terrorists that did commit acts will be brought to justice -- and those that did not will be released."

Asked about the unlikelihood of being named to a frontline job in the war on terror, after being fired as a US Attorney for alienating the Bush administration, Iglesias allowed: "It's been very ironic."

Here's the video:

We've got our own call in to Iglesias...

Senate Judiciary Committee

New Senate Report On US Attorney Firings Finds Rove Helped Compile List

Zachary Roth | November 18, 2008, 12:25PM

The Justice Department already found, in its report on the U.S. Attorney firings, that the White House engineered the firings, and that inappropriate political concerns had played in to several of the dismissals.

Still, the Senate Judiciary Committee released a report on the episode today that goes a little further. Its "Majority" (that is, Democratic) section concludes:

The evidence...shows that the list for firings was compiled with participation from the highest political ranks in the White House, including former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove.

The evidence shows that senior officials were focused on the political impact of Federal prosecutions and whether Federal prosecutors were doing enough to bring partisan voter fraud and corruption cases. It is now apparent that the reasons given for these firings, including those reasons provided in sworn testimony by the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, were contrived as part of a cover-up.

In a separate section, several committee Republicans strongly disagreed with that view, and, perhaps unsurprisingly, took the opportunity to highlight allegations of voter fraud against ACORN.

The report was released to accompany contempt resolutions against Rove and White House chief of staff Josh Bolten passed by the committee last year. The two have refused to testify or provide documents to the committee as part of its investigation.

In a statement accompanying the report committee chair Pat Leahy, of Vermont, said:

The findings of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the course of its investigation into the hiring and firing of U.S. Attorneys have been echoed by the Justice Department's own internal oversight offices. Further, the White House's unsupported claims of executive privilege and immunity designed to shield the President's advisors from complying with congressional subpoenas have been rejected by the federal court.

Voting

Voting-Rights Group Calls For Federal Probe Of New Mexico Voter Intimidation

Zachary Roth | October 24, 2008, 5:11PM

A major voting-rights group has sent a letter to New Mexico U.S. Attorney Gregory Fouratt, calling on him to investigate claims of voter intimidation and suppression.

The letter, from the group Project Vote, comes in the wake of reporting by TPMmuckraker and others about a private investigator -- who said he was working for Pat Rogers, a lawyer connected to the state GOP -- appearing at the homes of Hispanic voters in Albuquerque, and questioning them about their right to vote. In a press release announcing the letter, Project Vote refers directly to these reports.

In its letter, Project Vote -- a non-profit voting-rights group that works to increase voting in low-income and minority communities -- writes:

This form of intimidation and suppression is in direct violation of Section 12 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as well as Section 2. We feel that the right of all Americans to vote is of the utmost importance, and if there is credible evidence of voter intimidation and suppression of a particular class of voters it should be addressed and promptly persecuted.

Fouratt was appointed U.S. Attorney for the district after the 2006 firing of David Iglesias. According to a recent DOJ report, Iglesias was removed for his failure to prosecute voter fraud cases he believed to be bogus.

ACORN

Did New Mexico GOP Lawyer Hire P.I. To Intimidate Minority Voters?

Zachary Roth | October 24, 2008, 9:20AM

Minority voters in New Mexico report to TPMmuckraker that a private investigator working with Republican party lawyer Pat Rogers has appeared in person at the homes of their family members, intimidating and confusing them about their right to vote in the general election.

Earlier this week, we reported that Rogers -- a lawyer and state committeeman for the GOP, who in previous elections worked closely with the party in pressuring New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to pursue bogus voter fraud cases -- is involved with a new effort to gin up concerns about the issue. Last week the state party falsely claimed that 28 people had voted fraudulently in a local Democratic primary race in June. Rogers, described in an Associated Press report on the allegations as "an attorney who advises the state GOP," told the news wire that the party planned to turn the suspect forms over to law enforcement authorities.

The visits to minority voters by the P.I. appear to be connected to last week's effort.

The story starts last week, when several representatives of the New Mexico Republican party, including Rogers, held a press conference to announce that 28 people had voted fraudulently in a Democratic primary in June in Bernalillo county, which contains Albuquerque. The party released the names of ten of these people -- almost all of whom are Hispanic.

The allegations quickly fell apart. ACORN announced that it had contacted the county clerk's office, who had verified that all of the voters were in fact legitimate. The group now says it has independently contacted 8 of these 10 voters to separately verify their validity.

At that point, the national GOP, which had at first jumped on the story as rare evidence of genuine voter fraud, seemed to quietly back off.

But that wasn't the end of the story.

Guadalupe Bojorquez, who works in law enforcement in Albuquerque, told TPMmuckraker today that her mother, Dora Escobedo, was one of the ten voters whose names were released by the GOP. After this happened, said Bojorquez, her mother had been contacted by the voter registration group ACORN. Bojorquez, with ACORN's help, confirmed with the county clerk that her mother, who does not speak English, is indeed eligible to vote, and had been when she voted in June.

Nonetheless, Bojorquez said that her mother yesterday received a visit from a man who asked for her personal information, including an ID, in reference to her eligibility to vote. Bojorquez told TPMmuckraker that according to her mother, at one point the man asked what she would do if immigration authorities contacted her.

After Bojorquez's mother, frightened, refused to let him in the door, the man waited outside her house. Eventually, Bojorquez's brother arrived at the house, emboldening Bojorquez's mother to go outside, call Bojorquez, and put her on the phone with the man.

Bojorquez said the man told her he wanted to make sure her mother knew that she shouldn't be voting, and continued to ask for her mother's personal information. When Bojorquez said that no information would be handed over unless the man revealed who he was employed by, he said he was a private investigator hired by Pat Rogers. He told Bojorquez his name was Al Romero, and left a number at which Bojorquez could contact him.

Bojorquez added that in fact, her mother has already voted in the general election, by absentee ballot -- which she is eligible for because she has trouble walking -- so Romero's efforts on that front were in vain.

Another Albuquerque woman had a similar experience.

Jenais Griego told TPMmuckraker that yesterday, as she arrived home with her kids, a man in a beige Chevy Silverado pulled up, removed a notebook from his pocket, and said he was looking for Emily Garcia. Garcia is Griego's grandmother -- Griego said Garcia, who works as a home care-giver, lists Griego's address for her mail -- and, like Escobedo, was one of the voters named by the GOP last week as having voted fraudulently in June.

Griego said she allowed the man in, and when she asked him for identification, he pulled out a card that gave his name as Al Romero. She said the man had a redacted copy of Garcia's voter registration form, and asked whether Garcia intended to vote. He said if she intended to do so, she needed to make sure she was properly registered.

As with Bojorquez and Escobedo, Griego said that Garcia had already confirmed after the GOP press conference that she was indeed a valid voter. An ACORN worker had come to her house to explain that the GOP had questioned her registration, and, along with Griego, they had contacted the county clerk to ensure that she could legitimately vote, and had done so in June.

So when Romero asked Griego whether Garcia intended to vote, Griego replied that she did. At that point, said Griego, Romero became "angry" and "upset," and left abruptly.

Rogers did not return several calls from TPMmuckraker seeking comment. But last week he said that the state party had hired a private investigator in connection with vote fraud.

Reached by TPMmuckraker at the phone number he provided to Bojorquez, Romero said he didn't have time to talk about the matter. He did not respond to repeated follow-up calls.

ACORN

US Attorney's Office Involved In Voter-Fraud Probe in NM

Zachary Roth | October 22, 2008, 7:20PM

We've got a bit more information on the FBI's investigation into voter fraud that's taking place in New Mexico.

Last Friday, the Associated Press reported that FBI agents had met with Bernalillo County clerk Maggie Toulouse Oliver, "after she notified authorities about an estimated 1,500 possibly fraudulent voter registration cards."

And speaking today to TPMmuckraker, Toulouse Oliver added a bit of detail to that picture. She said she had passed on redacted copies of the suspicious forms (many of which had badly mismatched information, or listed addresses that did not exist) to the offices of the District Attorney and the US Attorney in the area. When the FBI contacted her, it said it had been asked to follow up by the US Attorney' office. And the meeting between Toulouse Oliver and an FBI agent was also attended by an Assistant US Attorney.

The US Attorney's office didn't return a call seeking comment. But it appears that the office is taking a lead role in the investigation.

It's worth noting that David Iglesias was fired from that very US Attorney's office largely for his reluctance to pursue bogus voter fraud claims.

What's still unclear is how closely the probe is tied to the nationwide investigation into ACORN's voter registration activities that we learned about last week. ACORN is active in Bernalillo County.

Voting

NM GOP Lawyer Pushing Voter Fraud: It's "Single Greatest Wedge Issue Ever."

Zachary Roth | October 21, 2008, 3:05PM

Yesterday we told you about Pat Rogers, the New Mexico Republican lawyer who, according to reports, is deeply involved in the state party's effort to make an issue out of voter fraud -- despite essentially no evidence that such fraud is occurring. As we noted, Rogers also played a central role a few years ago in pressuring former U.S. attorney David Iglesias to bring politically motivated voter-fraud cases. Iglesias' reluctance to bring such cases led to his firing in 2006.

But it's worth paying a bit more attention to Rogers, to see how the Justice Department's new nationwide investigation into ACORN, in which New Mexico seems to be a crucial focus -- appears to represent the very same politicization of DOJ that was exposed in the scandal over the US attorney firings.

As we noted yesterday, Rogers' role in pressing Iglesias to pursue voter fraud prosecutions was extensive. According to the OIG report on the firings, Rogers set up a lunch meeting with Iglesias, and met with an FBI agent -- among many other activities -- to push the issue.

Perhaps most damagingly, the report contains a September 2004 email sent to Iglesias and several staffers for New Mexico's GOP congressional delegation, in which Rogers admitted that he was interested in the issue in large part for its potential to help the GOP:

I believe the [voter] ID issue should be used (now) at all levels - federal, state legislative races and Heather [Wilson]'s race ... You are not going to find a better wedge issue ... I've got to believe the [voter] ID issue would do Heather more good than another ad talking about how much federal taxpayer money she has put into the (state) education system and social security ... This is the single best wedge issue, ever in NM. We will not have this opportunity again ... Today, we expect to file a new Public Records lawsuit, by 3 Republican legislators, demanding the Bernalillo county clerk locate and produce (before Oct 15) ALL of the registrations signed by the ACORN employee.

But Rogers is no mere local player on the Republican voter fraud team. He was on the board of the American Center for Voting Rights (ACVR), a fake think-tank which was little more than an effort by GOP operatives to offer an intellectual gloss to politically motivated claims of voter fraud -- and which abruptly closed down operations in 2007.

ACVR was run by Mark "Thor" Hearne, who served as national election counsel to President Bush's 2004 reelection campaign. Jim Dyke -- who was the communications director of the Republican National Committee during the 2004 election, and went on to work for both the White House and for Vice President Cheney -- was also involved.

Writing in Slate last year, election-law expert Rick Hasen described ACVR's modus operandi:

Consisting of little more than a post-office box and some staffers who wrote reports and gave helpful quotes about the pervasive problems of voter fraud to the press, the group identified Democratic cities as hot spots for voter fraud, then pushed the line that "election integrity" required making it harder for people to vote. The group issued reports (PDF) on areas in the country of special concern, areas that coincidentally tended to be presidential battleground states. In many of these places, it now appears the White House was pressuring U.S. attorneys to bring more voter-fraud prosecutions.

Here's Rogers, on behalf of ACVR, telling CNN back in 2004 about the need for "safeguards to make sure that citizens only are voting."

And now this is the guy who's involved in pushing voter fraud claims in connection with an investigation in which the FBI is already involved.

Rogers did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It's also worth keeping in mind that New Mexico -- which went for Al Gore in 2000 by just 365 votes, and President Bush in 2004 by around 6000 -- is crucial for John McCain's chances. Today, MSNBC.com quotes an RNC official saying: "[T]he numbers -- public and private -- in the [south west] have swung wildly. We believe the possibility of NV or NM breaking at the last minute is likely and we have our dominos lined up to knock down the win at the last minute."

It looks like one of those dominoes is Rogers' effort to use bogus claims of voter fraud as "the single best wedge issue ever."

ACORN

NM GOP Lawyer Cited In Iglesias Firing Is Back Pushing Bogus Voter Fraud Claims

Zachary Roth | October 20, 2008, 6:41PM

The evidence is growing that the FBI's investigation into ACORN is just the latest iteration of the unprecedented politicization of the Department of Justice that was exposed in the US attorney firings scandal.

Rep. John Conyers, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, today released a second letter about the FBI probe to Attorney General Michael Mukasey. Conyers
noted that the New Mexico GOP last week held a press conference where it publicly named people it said had voted fraudulently in a Democratic primary in June, as part of an ongoing FBI investigation into voter fraud. (ACORN appears to have subsequently shown that those voters were in fact valid.)

And Conyers goes on to make a great catch. He notes that "New Mexico lawyer Pat Rogers -- described in the local press as 'an attorney who advises the state GOP' -- is apparently playing a key role in pressing these current claims." (Conyers is referring to this Associated Press report.)

Conyers continues:

Mr. Rogers, however, appears repeatedly in the report on the U.S. Attorney firings, prepared by the Department's Office of the Inspector General and Professional Responsibility, which documented his actions making flawed claims of voter fraud and bringing unwarranted pressure to bear on law enforcement officials, including Mr. Iglesias, in 2006.

In other words, one of the very same New Mexico GOP activists who was found in the OIG report to have tried to pressure David Iglesias to bring bogus voter-fraud prosecutions is still on the case, and has now helped to get a new federal investigation launched just weeks before the election.

And remember: the OIG report definitively concluded that Iglesias was fired as New Mexico's US attorney for his reluctance to follow up on politically motivated voter-fraud claims, made by local Republicans including Rogers.

There's a broader point worth making too: It's looking more and more like New Mexico is ground zero for the FBI's new investigation. (Remember that the Wall Streeet Journal had reported back on October 9 -- a good week before the news of a nationwide FBI probe broke -- that the bureau was looking into voter fraud in New Mexico.) And given what we saw happen to Iglesias, the FBI's focus on the state, apparently in response to GOP complaints, is further evidence that what's happening in 2008 has as a lot in common with what happened in 2006.

Voting

Ex-DOJ Voting Rights Chief On Bogus Voter Fraud Probe: "There Is No Shame."

Zachary Roth | October 20, 2008, 12:33PM

Since the news was reported last week that the FBI, less than three weeks before the election, is launching a voter-registration-fraud investigation into ACORN, we've seen a number of former top DOJ voting-rights officials --as well as former US attorney David Iglesias -- denounce the probe as an inappropriate politicization of the department.

Add Joe Rich to the list. Rich, who from 1999 until 2005 ran the voting section in the department's civil rights division, and is now at the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, told TPMmuckraker this morning that the ACORN investigation is "much worse than what happened in 2006."

Rich was referring to an indictment for voter fraud against four ACORN voter-registration workers, filed by Bradley Schlozman, an interim US attorney in Kansas City, just five days before a close Missouri Senate election. Schlozman later was investigated for possible perjury after testifying to Congress that he was "directed" by main DOJ to pursue the indictment, then filing a "clarification" in which he took "full responsibility" for the prosecution.

Noting that the Bush administration appears to be using the Department of Justice to pursue politically motivated voter-fraud investigations, even after getting caught red-handed doing so in the scandal over the US attorney firings, Rich added: "There is no shame."

David Iglesias

Ex DOJ Voting Rights Chief: "It's Going to Take a Long Time to Cleanse" Department

Zachary Roth | October 17, 2008, 5:34PM

A former top Department of Justice voting rights official -- who once worked with John McCain in defense of the senator's campaign-finance reform bill -- has added his name to the growing chorus that is denouncing the department's investigation of ACORN as a shameful and inappropriate politicization of Justice along the lines of the US attorney firings.

Speaking to TPMmuckraker, Gerry Hebert described the investigation, word of which was leaked off the record to the Associated Press less than three weeks before the election, as "a continuation of injecting DOJ into what has clearly become a political issue."

He continued: "That's really not the proper role for the DOJ, and why their policies counsel otherwise."

To demonstrate that point, Hebert provided TPMmuckraker with a copy of the department's Manual on Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses.

Under a section headlined "Investigative Considerations in Election Fraud Cases", the manual reads:

When investigating election fraud, three considerations that are absent from most criminal investigations must be kept in mind: (1) respect for the primary role of the states in administering the voting process, (2) an awareness of the role of the election in the governmental process, and (3) sensitivity to the exercise of First Amendment rights in the election context. As a result there are limitations on various investigative steps in an election fraud case.

In most cases, election-related documents should not be taken from the custody of local election administrators until the election to which they pertain has been certified, and the time for contesting the election results has expired. This avoids interfering with the governmental processes affected by the election

Another limitation affects voter interviews. Election fraud cases often depend on the testimony of individual voters whose votes were co-opted in one way or another. But in most cases voters should not be interviewed, or other voter-related investigation done, until after the election is over. Such overt investigative steps may chill legitimate voting activities. They are also likely to be perceived by voters and candidates as an intrusion into the election. Indeed, the fact of a federal criminal investigation may itself become an issue in the election.

Although it is unclear whether the FBI has taken information or interviewed voters, Hebert argued that the new ACORN investigation clearly violates the manual's guidelines, both in terms of its timing -- initiated so close to election day -- and in terms of the off-the-record leak by which it was publicized.

Hebert served 21 years at DOJ's civil-rights division, including a stint as acting head of the voting rights section.* He left in 1994 and now heads a public interest legal non-profit. In 2003, he represented McCain and Sen. Russ Feingold, when the campaign-finance reform legislation authored by the two senators was challenged by conservative activist groups.

Hebert, noting that he had been at DOJ during the administrations of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, added: "During the twenty-one years I was there, even though there were political appointees who I worked with, never did we inject partisan considerations into our law-enforcement responsibilities. That has clearly not been the case in recent years under this administration. And it's going to take a long time to cleanse the Department of Justice."

The Obama campaign, House Judiciary chair John Conyers, and, in an interview with TPMmuckraker, former US attorney David Iglesias, have all also connected the FBI's ACORN investigation to the kind of politicization exposed in the firings saga.

* This sentence has been corrected from an earlier version.

David Iglesias

Obama Camp Connects ACORN Probe to US Attorneys Scandal

Zachary Roth | October 17, 2008, 3:01PM

Add the Obama campaign to the growing list of players who think that DOJ's election-eve investigation into ACORN is a repeat of the politicization of the department that we saw in the US attorney firings scandal.

"With this voter fraud [investigation], we're seeing an unholy alliance of law enforcement and the ugliest form of partisan politics," Bob Bauer, an elections lawyer with the Obama camp, said on a conference call with reporters just now. Bauer compared the decision to launch the investigation with the US attorneys scandal, in which several US attorneys were fired for their unwillingess to pursue politically charged cases, including voter fraud, with sufficient aggression to satisfy the Bush administration.

Bauer released a letter sent to Attorney General Michael Mukasey calling on him to have the issue taken on by Nora Dannehy, the prosecutor he appointed to investigate the US attorney firings.

Bauer went on to accuse John McCain of "trying to create a much greater doubt about the electoral process altogether," by alleging that ACORN voter fraud could threaten the fabric of our democracy, as McCain claimed in the debate Wednesday night.

House Judiciary chair John Conyers, as well as David Iglesias -- whose firing as US attorney was a direct result of his reluctance to pursue GOP-pushed claims of voter fraud, according to the recent OIG report -- have also connected the FBI's ACORN investigation to the kind of politicization exposed in the firings saga.

Voting

Ex-DOJ Vet: Under Bush "We Might Have Gotten Away From" Tradition of Independence

Zachary Roth | October 17, 2008, 12:10PM

It's not just David Iglesias who thinks the Bush administration has inappropriately politicized the Department of Justice.

Paul Hancock, a former top official with the DOJ's civil-rights division, told TPMmuckraker that during his tenure, the department responded in an independent and non-partisan manner to outside pressure to bring politically sensitive cases. But "I think we might have gotten away from that in this administration," he said.

Hancock, who left the department in 1997, stressed that, in his view, it's too soon to know whether the FBI's investigation into ACORN is politically driven, and said that such investigations are not unusual. But they usually would not be aggressively carried out so close to an election, for fear of their existence being made public, and thereby affecting the election.

It remains unclear how far along the ACORN investigation is.

Voting

Unchastened, NM Republicans Still Pushing Voter Fraud

Zachary Roth | October 17, 2008, 9:28AM

This morning, we noticed an RNC press release in our inbox, breathlessly touting an Associated Press story that reports:

"The New Mexico Republican Party say they believe 28 people voted fraudulently in an Albuquerque state House district in the June Democratic primary."

Of course, as faithful TPMmuckraker readers know, David Iglesias -- who yesterday told us he was "astounded" by the FBI's new investigation of ACORN in connection with nationwide voter fraud -- was fired as U.S. attorney for the district of New Mexico in large part for failing to follow up on voter fraud complaints with sufficient aggressiveness to please the Bush administration. And many of those complaints came also from the New Mexico Republican Party.

According to the recently released report on the firings by the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General, Allen Weh, the state party chair, continually pressed Iglesias to make voter fraud a priority, and in 2005 sent an email to Karl Rove and others in the White House office in which he asked for Iglesias to be removed, and a replacement appointed "that takes voter fraud seriously."

The report concluded:

complaints from New Mexico Republican politicians and party activists about Iglesias's handling of voter fraud and corruption cases were the reasons for his
removal as U.S. Attorney.

Still, it looks like the party is still out there pushing the issue.

It's not that we were expecting the GOP to act chastened after getting caught pressuring non-partisan law enforcement officials to pursue bogus and politically motivated cases of voter fraud.

But sometimes the cognitive dissonance is too much to let pass.

Voting

Iglesias: "I'm Astounded" By DOJ's ACORN Probe

Zachary Roth | October 16, 2008, 6:50PM

David Iglesias says he's shocked by the news, leaked today to the Associated Press, that the FBI is pursuing a voter-fraud investigation into ACORN just weeks before the election.

"I'm astounded that this issue is being trotted out again," Iglesias told TPMmuckraker. "Based on what I saw in 2004 and 2006, it's a scare tactic." In 2006, Iglesias was fired as U.S. attorney thanks partly to his reluctance to pursue voter-fraud cases as aggressively as DOJ wanted -- one of several U.S. attorneys fired for inappropriate political reasons, according to a recently released report by DOJ's Office of the Inspector General.

Iglesias, who has been the most outspoken of the fired U.S. attorneys, went on to say that the FBI's investigation seemed designed to inappropriately create a "boogeyman" out of voter fraud.

And he added that it "stands to reason" that the investigation was launched in response to GOP complaints. In recent weeks, national Republican figures -- including John McCain at last night's debate -- have sought to make an issue out of ACORN's voter-registration activities.

As we noted earlier, last year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein publicly highlighted changes made to DOJ's election crimes manual, which lowered the bar for voter-fraud prosecutions, and made it easier to bring vote-fraud cases close to the election.

Speaking today to TPMmuckraker, Iglesias called such changes "extremely problematic."

The way in which the news was revealed today -- Associated Press sourced its report to two "senior law enforcement officials" who "spoke on condition of anonymity because Justice Department regulations forbid discussing ongoing investigations particularly so close to an election" -- is also raising eyebrows.

Both Iglesias and Bud Cummins -- another of the U.S. attorneys who, according to the IG report, was also fired for political reasons -- told TPMmuckraker that DOJ guidelines do allow US attorneys to speak publicly about an investigation, even before bringing an indictment, if it's to allay public concern over an issue.

But that certainly wouldn't cover anonymous leaks. "If you can't say it with your name on it, it's fair to say you should not be saying it," Cummins told TPMmuckraker.

Earlier this afternoon, House Judiciary Chair John Conyers (D-MI) released a letter he sent to Attorney General Michael Mukasey and FBI director Robert Mueller, which connected today's news to the U.S. attorney firings, and to recent GOP efforts to stoke fears over voter fraud.

Harriet Miers

Report Shows White House Engineered U.S. Attorney Firings

Zachary Roth | October 1, 2008, 4:28PM

Now that the dust has settled on the U.S. attorney firings report, released Monday morning by the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General, we thought it was worth taking some time to lay out what it tells us.

Almost since the scandal broke early last year, there have been clear signs that the plan to fire U.S. attorneys as a means of advancing the Bush administration's political goals was being driven by the White House. That impression has been strengthened as top current and former White House officials, including Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, have consistently stonewalled efforts to look into the matter.

The OIG investigation was no exception. As the report notes, Miers, Rove and several other Whte House officials refused to talk to investigators, and the White House wouldn't provide internal emails or documents relating to the firings. Perhaps the most crucial of the documents denied to OIG was a memo, written in March 2007, which contained the results of an internal White House investigation into the firings, conducted by associate White House counsel Michael Scudder. Scudder had interviewed top DOJ and White House officials, including Rove, and had compiled a timeline that "appeared to contain information we had not obtained elsewhere in our investigation," according to the OIG report.

Still, a close examination of the report makes clear that, although on a day-to-day basis the plan was put into effect by mid-level DOJ political appointees -- enabled by a shocking lack of oversight from top department officials, principally former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- the impetus for the move came straight from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Many of the individual pieces of information have been previously reported, as DOJ provided emails and internal documents to Congress for its 2007 investigation. But the OIG report provides a far clearer sense of the longer-term trajectory of the plan, and the consistent interest in it from Miers and Rove, than we've yet been offered.

Read more »

Alberto Gonzales

The OIG Report: Tying Up Loose Ends

Kate Klonick | October 1, 2008, 3:00PM

In the almost two years that TPMmuckraker has been covering the scandal over the removal of the U.S. attorneys, there have been many questions raised over the reasons behind the firings. On Monday, the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General's report answered some of those, but raised others. While it concluded that only three of the firings were carried out for political reasons or to interfere with active prosecutions, it could not gather sufficient evidence to conclude the rest of the firings were politically based. Regardless, the report strongly condemned the DOJs overall mishandling of the firings, calling the process "fundamentally flawed . . unsystematic and arbitrary."

As we wrote earlier this week, the report reveals that Todd Graves, David Iglesias and Bud Cummins were fired for reasons of politics, not performance.

The report lays out the investigations into each of the remaining U.S. attorney firings, but repeatedly states that its analysis and investigation were "hindered" due to many witnesses' "lack of recall"; the refusal of many witnesses to cooperate with the investigation or give testimony; and the administration's stonewalling in disclosing documents. Citing these obstacles, the report hedges its findings, requesting a prosecutor to continue the investigation with the power to compel testimony.

In the case of Margaret Chiara, the former Western Michigan U.S. attorney, the report could find no evidence that the rumors that Chiara was in a lesbian relationship with one of her subordinates were behind her removal.

Chiara has stated publicly that she believes the rumors -- which she called "false and malicious" in a statement yesterday from her attorney -- were the reason for the loss of her position.

Carol Lam, the U.S. attorney in the Southern District of California, was believed to have been asked to resign over her prosecution of former Executive Director of the CIA, Dusty Foggo and Brent Wilkes, a defense contractor who bribed former Republican Rep. Duke Cunningham and Foggo. But the report "found no evidence" to support those claims, stating that "the investigation and prosecution of Cunningham and Foggo were aggressively pursued by career prosecutors in Lam's office, both during and after her tenure."

Instead, the report supports the Department's previous claims that Lam was removed because of her poor statistics on gun and immigration prosecution statistics -- but blames the DOJ for poor handling of her removal.

In the case of Daniel Bogden of Nevada, little was known about his removal, except that he had not been diligent in prosecution of obscenity cases. The report found the claim to be behind Bogden's removal, but added some color to the removal. Interestingly, the report found that the complaints of Bodgen's dalliance in obscenity prosecutions were made by Brent Ward, the head of the DOJ Obscenity Prosecution Task Force -- who was friends with Attorney General Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson's brother and had direct conversations with Sampson regularly.

When questioned by the DOJ, Sampson stated he "did not recall whether those complaints played a role in the decision to remove Bogden," a response the report found "particularly suspect, given his role in the removal process."

In Arizona, Paul Charlton's termination was believed to be connected to his investigation of Republican Rep. Rick Renzi, but the report states that it could find no evidence to support that claim. Charlton had previously clashed with Main Justice on a decision he made to not seek the death penalty on a case involving a murder that transpired during a drug deal. Charlton believed it was this death penalty case as well as his policy of tape recording interrogations that led to his removal -- theories the IG report confirmed as the primary reasons for his dismissal.

Lastly, there is Seattle's John McKay who was believed to have been fired over his failure to prosecute voter fraud related to the 2004 Washington governor's election.

McKay famously received a call from Ed Cassidy, chief of staff to Washington Rep. Richard Hastings (R) asking about his prosecution, to which McKay responded, "Ed, I'm sure you're not about to start talking to me about the future direction of this case," after which Cassidy quickly ended the call.

Hastings claimed ignorance and told investigators that "he could not remember telling Cassidy to call McKay. . . or whether Cassidy had told him he had done so."

The report also mentions a meeting in Washington between McKay and White House Counsel Harriet Miers in which Miers reportedly asked McKay "why Republicans in the state of Washington were angry with him."

The report concludes that the "evidence suggests" that the primary reason for McKay's removal was an argument with Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty over an information sharing program -- not because of failure to prosecute voter fraud as McKay conjectured.

The OIG report, though nearly 400 pages long, is far from comprehensive. The investigation lacked the power to compel testimony or documents outside of the Justice Department and were consequently limited in their investigation. As a result, the report is forced to reserve judgment on whether many of the firings were inappropriately political, though it recommends that a prosecutor be appointed to look into whether crimes were committed.

Nora Dannehy, appointed on Monday by Attorney General Michael Mukasey will take up that mantle. It remains to be seen if that will be enough to ferret the truth out of unwilling witnesses and departments.

U.S. Attorneys

Rove Emails Spotlight White House Role in U.S. Attorney Firing

Kate Klonick | September 29, 2008, 6:35PM

The IG report released today provides new details on the White House's involvement in the firings of U.S. attorneys, especially the administration's involvement in the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias.

Prior to Iglesias' removal on Dec. 7, 2006, New Mexico GOP Sen. Pete Domenici had already made multiple complaints to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales about Iglesias. In addition, Mickey Barnett, a former GOP New Mexico state senator and a prominent lawyer, had met in Washington with DOJ White House Liason Monica Goodling to discuss his problems with Iglesias' handling of voter fraud cases.

But emails disclosed in the recently released IG report between Barnett, Domenici and White House political operative Karl Rove reveal that the complaints against Iglesias went beyond talks with the Justice Department, and that the White House was aware and involved in the removal of Iglesias from his post as U.S. attorney.

According to today's report, on October 2, 2006, Barnett e-mailed Karl Rove an article from a local paper expressing frustrations with the apparently stalled investigation into bribery of Democratic state Sen. Manny Aragon (NM).

In the email, Barnett blamed Iglesias' office for delaying the case against the Democratic lawmaker, something he had spoken to Goodling, Rove and Domenici about before, according to conversations detailed in the report. Specifically, Barnett and Rove had previously discussed "kick[ing Iglesias]. . . upstairs" as a way to get rid of him.

The October 2 email from Barnett to Rove again mentions the possibility of a "promotion" for Iglesias, and their face to face discussion of it the weekend before at a Republican fundraiser in New Mexico.

From page 173 of the report:

Karl,
This article confirms what I mentioned Saturday. An FBI agent told me more than six months ago that their investigation was done and been turned over to the US Attorney a long time ago. He said agents were totally frustrated with some even trying to get out
of New Mexico. I can put you or anyone you designate with lawyers knowledgeable about the US Atty office - including lawyers in the office - that will show how poorly it is being run.
Scott Jennings was kind enough to set up an appointment at the Justice Department several months ago where Pat Rogers and I laid all this out. I hope Justice can now be persuaded to send out some cracker jack prosecutor and perhaps promote Iglesias to a Justice department position.
We still await the results of the task force Iglesias convened about this time two years ago on the clear Acorn fraudulent voter registrations. We were told it would look to [sic] "political" to indict anyone that close to the election. Then we never heard anything else

Just a few weeks after Barnett's email, Domenici's chief of staff Steve Bell emailed Rove on Nov. 7, 2006, the day of mid-term Congressional elections complaining about ballot problems in a New Mexico precinct. Bell closed the email with the statement, "We worry about the USA here."

Rove responded just 32 minutes later stating, "I'd have the Senator call the Attorney General about this."

Exactly one month later, Iglesias was fired.

David Iglesias

Iglesias: Information on My Firing "Is Going To Have To Be Forced Out Of The Administration."

Zachary Roth | September 29, 2008, 2:16PM

David Iglesias, the former US attorney whose dismissal was deemed the "most troubling" in today's IG report, says he still wants to see the full range of evidence about the White House's possible role in the firing. That includes all relevant emails and notes from meetings -- information the White House held back from the IG's investigators.

"That's the critical bit of information that we don't have right now," Iglesias told TPMmuckraker. He added: "I suspect that the information is going to have to be forced out of the administration."

Still, the former U.S. attorney said he feels vindicated by the report's conclusion that he was removed not because of managerial deficiencies but thanks to political pressure from the office of GOP senator Pete Domenici and New Mexico Republican activists. That conclusion "is consistent with what I've been saying all along," he said.

Iglesias stressed that he was heartened by the Justice Department's appointment of a prosecutor, Nora Dannehy, in the case. "I"m glad that DOJ is taking this seriously," he said.

David Iglesias

White House, DOJ, Domenici Stonewalled IG On Iglesias Firing

Zachary Roth | September 29, 2008, 11:43AM

The just-released IG report on the US attorney firings lists the removal of David Iglesias as the "most troubling" of the eight. But it notes that thanks to stonewalling by the White House, DOJ officials, and the office of Sen. Pete Domenici, investigators didn't have access to the complete range of information on the reasons for the firing.

The report concludes that Iglesias was removed as a result of complaints brought to DOJ by New Mexico GOP members of Congress and party activists, and shows that Karl Rove knew in advance of the decision. It reveals that at a meeting on November 15, 2006, Rep. Heather Wilson told Rove: "Mr. Rove, for what it's worth, the U.S. Attorney in New Mexico is a waste of breath." Rove's response: ""That decision has already been made. He's gone."

But it states that IG investigators were unable to determine how Rove knew this (Iglesias wasn't notifed until December 7), and what his possible role in the decision was, because Rove and White House counsel Harriet Miers refused to cooperate with the investigation.

Similarly, it notes that Kyle Sampson, who as chief of staff to Alberto Gonzales took the lead in bringing about the firings, gave "misleading after-the-fact explanations for why Iglesias was placed on the list." The report concludes: "[W]e question whether Sampson provided us the full story about Iglesias's placement on the list, as well as the reasons for other U.S. Attorney removals."

And: "Our investigation was also hindered by the refusal of Senator Domenici and his Chief of Staff to agree to an interview by us." (In April, Domenici, who is retiring this year, received a "qualified admonition" from the Senate ethics committee for his role in the firing.)

Looks like the across-the-board effort to withhold information from the IG investigators was perhaps at its most intense in regard to the Iglesias firing.

U.S. Attorneys

Report Recommends Appointment of Special Prosecutor

Kate Klonick | September 29, 2008, 10:30AM

The IG report released today requests a special prosecutor to continue the work of the investigation into whether the nine U.S. attorneys removed in 2006 were fired for partisan political reasons.

From page 357 and 358 of the IG report:

The most serious allegation that we were not able to fully investigate related to the removal of David Iglesias, the U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, and the allegation that he was removed to influence voter fraud and public corruption prosecutions. We recommend that a counsel specially appointed by the Attorney General assess the facts we have uncovered, work with us to conduct further investigation, and ultimately determine whether the evidence demonstrates that any criminal offense was committed with regard to the removal of Iglesias or any other U.S. Attorney, or the testimony of any witness related to the U.S. Attorney removals.

Late update: The report also describes the stonewalling the investigation received in trying to gather information on the removals. Specifically, it mentions a "fact memo" created for Alberto Gonzales by the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel, which outlined the events chronologically, using a draft written by Michael Scudder, associate White House Counsel. Investigators were refused the timeline by the OLC who claimed they were ordered not to release it by the White House Counsel's office.

From page 94 of the report:

We asked OLC for a copy of the memorandum and all the drafts, but OLC declined, stating that the White House Counsel's Office had directed OLC not to provide them to us. We thereafter engaged in discussions with the White House Counsel's Office during this investigation in an attempt to obtain the Scudder memorandum. The White House Counsel's Office agreed to read one paragraph of the memorandum to us, and provided us with two paragraphs of information concerning Rove that had already been reported publicly, but declined to provide any further information from the memorandum.
Eventually, the White House Counsel's Office provided us with a heavily redacted version of the document. We believe the refusal to provide us with an unredacted copy of this document hampered our investigation.

DOJ Office Of The Inspector General

DOJ Report On U.S. Attorney Firings To Be Issued Monday

Zachary Roth | September 26, 2008, 4:07PM

The Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General will on Monday morning release on its website its report into the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, according to David Iglesias, one of the former U.S. attorneys whose firing is at issue.

Iglesias told TPMmuckraker that he had been notified about the report's imminent release by Mark Masling, one of the investigators on the case. Iglesias said Masling told him that the report, which has been in the works since March 2007, is "very long" but wouldn't offer further details.

The probe, which centers on the firing of Iglesias and seven other U.S. attorneys, expanded to address allegations that a DOJ official, Monica Goodling, illegally took party affiliation into account in the hiring and firing federal prosecutors.

In July, Iglesias made some predictions about the reports conclusions, telling Harper's:

I expect them to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to show that former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty committed perjury in their statements before Congressional committees and investigators.

David Iglesias

Iglesias Riffs on Predictions for Upcoming OIG Report

Kate Klonick | July 23, 2008, 4:26PM

Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias has been giving lots of talks as he promotes his new book, In Justice, but this interview with Harper's has been one of the best so far.

Iglesias treads a lot of old ground, but he also gives an interesting look ahead. As we wait for the OIG's report on the U.S. attorney firing scandal to drop, this is a good reminder of what we have to look forward to (Iglesias' response is in italics):

The Justice Department's Inspector General (OIG) and the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) have been investigating the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, including yourself, and their report is now due. The OPR has been heavily criticized lately for its failure to follow through on major investigations, and it has been manipulated--sometimes overtly--by political appointees. OIG has maintained its independence and integrity, however. Have you been interviewed in connection with this probe? Did it strike you as thorough and professional? Do you expect a report to be issued shortly, and if so, what are the major conclusions you would anticipate?

Yes, I was interviewed by attorneys from both OIG and OPR. They initially interviewed me in Albuquerque in June, 2007. They called me a couple more times with follow-up questions. I viewed them as professional and thorough. I expect the report to be filed any day now. I expect them to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to show that former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty committed perjury in their statements before Congressional committees and investigators. They may find that former McNulty chief of staff Mike Elston intimidated witnesses based on his calls to former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins of Arkansas. I was aware that Elston had told Cummins that "the gloves would come off" if we kept speaking out about our forced resignations. I found out after In Justice went to print that Elston also told Cummins we would be "thrown under the bus" for our speaking out. It is appalling that a former career federal prosecutor like Elston would so flagrantly violate the law against witness intimidation. There may be enough evidence to warrant a formal investigation of conspiracy and obstruction of justice charges against Gonzales, McNulty and Elston.

Must Read

Today's Must Read

Paul Kiel | April 25, 2008, 10:17AM

Ooh, that must sting. For ringing up his state's U.S. attorney at bedtime to interrogate him about whether that high-profile corruption case against a prominent state Democrat will result in an indictment before the election, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) has been branded with the dreaded QA: that's right, qualified admonition.

The Senate ethics committee says it left no stone unturned in coming to this conclusion, including interviewing "current and former executive branch officials and attorneys," but that the "Committee finds no substantial evidence to determine that [Domenici] attempted to improperly influence an ongoing investigation." The key word there being "substantial."

The U.S. attorney, David Iglesias, who was of course fired a little more than a month after Domenici's call, testified that the call made him sick. And so the committee says that Domenici "should have known" better -- that such a call would create an "appearance of impropriety." But appearance of impropriety aside, maybe the good senator was just looking for an update. You know, just ringing up the local prosecutor at home to see how things are going.

The modesty of the punishment matches the modesty of the investigation. It wasn't the committee's job to investigate the U.S. attorney firings in general: "We do emphasize, however, that the Committee confined its inquiry to your October 2006 call to Mr. Iglesias, its context and consequences and related actions by you or your office."

Nevertheless, as Domenici serves out his last year in the Senate, it's worth reminding ourselves of the broader context.

Such as the fact that when the story first broke that two lawmakers had called Iglesias shortly before the 2006 election, the lawmakers were not identified, resulting in a media scramble to identify them. When all other members of the New Mexico delegation responded that they'd never done such a thing, Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) went to ground and refused to comment. Finally, cornered by an AP reporter, Domenici said "I don't have any comment. I have no idea what he's talking about."

But when it became apparent that Iglesias would be testifying to Congress about the call, Domenici eventually developed an idea and fessed up. He apologized, but said "I have never pressured him nor threatened him in any way." In their letter yesterday, the committee thanked Domenici for the "candor" of that statement.

Neither Domenici nor Wilson have admitted that it was Iglesias' failure to speedily dispatch with a couple high-profile corruption investigations into state Democrats that led to their dissatisfaction. Rather, they both hewed to the coded criticism that Iglesias had been slow to move cases -- when it's evident that they were really only talking about a few cases in particular.

We know that Domenici was also instrumental in Iglesias' firing, making calls not only to the Justice Department, but also to the White House. Of course, Iglesias had plenty of enemies, so it's certainly possible that other Republicans got him canned for, say, not jumping on the voter fraud bandwagon, and that's always been Domenici's best alibi.

But if you're looking to find out more about the context of Iglesias' firing, the Justice Department's forthcoming inspector general report will be much more informative.

U.S. Attorneys

Fired U.S. Attorney: Use of FBI to Contact Jurors "Smells of Intimidation"

Paul Kiel | April 14, 2008, 3:57PM

Count former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias among those who are critical of prosecutors' use of FBI agents to contact jurors from the Pittsburgh trial of Dr. Cyril Wecht.

The contacts came after the judge declared a mistrial because the jury was hung. Jurors have since told reporters that most of them had wanted to acquit Wecht. Nevertheless, prosecutors immediately declared their intent to retry the case.

Iglesias, one of the nine U.S. attorneys fired in 2006 as part of the political purge, told me that he'd "never heard" of such a thing. "Using the FBI smells of intimidation. The [prosecutors] should have picked up the phone and called the jurors themselves. I would have not authorized the FBI to contact jurors in this manner."

The spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan has said that using the FBI agents was "commonplace."

"If that's true," Iglesias said, "I would change the practice because it sends the wrong message to people."

Iglesias also said that the case -- which involves charges that Wecht, then Allegheny County's coroner, wrongly billed taxpayers for mileage and gas costs that were really related to his personal business, costs that his lawyers say amount to less than $2,000 -- sounds "penny-ante" to him. "The loss to the government is so small," he said, that he thought many local prosecutors, let alone federal prosecutors, would "turn it down for being de minimis."

U.S. Attorneys

Iglesias: Bush Buddy USA Said Firings Were "Political"

Paul Kiel | March 7, 2008, 12:32PM

It's hard to think back to that time when it was arguable that administration officials were telling the truth when they protested that the U.S. attorneys had been fired for "performance" reasons.

That seems pretty much resolved now. All of the main players: Alberto Gonzales, his deputy Paul McNulty, Kyle Sampson, Monica Goodling, Sarah Taylor, et al. are all gone. But before it all went kablooey, before the firings even became public, former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias says that he learned what it eventually took a raging scandal to publicly reveal.

The disclosure comes from Iglesias' book, "In Justice," which is due out in June. In the passage, the details of which were first reported last night by McClatchy, Iglesias writes of a conversation he had with U.S. Attorney for San Antonio Johnny Sutton shortly after he'd been asked to resign. Iglesias thought that Sutton, a longtime friend of Bush's who was the chairman of the committee of U.S. attorneys that advised the attorney general, could help him out. It turned out, no. Here it is:

“I’ve got a sense this is a done deal, David,” he flatly told me after listening to my story.

“Based on what?” I asked, swallowing hard. Maybe I should have just hung up then. It was clear from the guarded tone of his voice that he wouldn’t, or couldn’t, help me.

“Look,” he said, in the same matter-of-fact manner. “I’ve been around awhile. This is political. If I were you, I’d just go quietly.”

I couldn't believe what I was hearing: a U.S. Attorney all but admitting that a colleague was being hung out to dry for reasons that had nothing to do with performance or professionalism. “How do you know?” was all I could ask.

There was long silence on the other end. “I saw your name,” he said at last, in a barely audible voice.

It took a minute for the implications to sink in. “Where?” I finally asked. “You mean, there’s some sort of list?”

“I can’t speak to that,” he answered blandly, and I knew, at that moment, that it was useless to continue.

It's not clear, exactly, what Sutton meant, and his office didn't return our call. At the very least, he meant that it wasn't worth Iglesias trying to contest the firing on the merits, since there weren't any (despite what Justice Department officials later told Congress).

We'll have more later from the book.

Michael Mukasey

Fired USA: Mukasey "Gets It"

Paul Kiel | October 18, 2007, 2:42PM

Michael Mukasey sought to assure senators (and seems to have been successful) that there'd be no repeat of the U.S. attorney firings scandal on his watch.

So, now that Mukasey's hearings are done, what do the fired U.S. attorneys think about Alberto Gonzales' replacement?

Former U.S.A. for New Mexico David Iglesias, for one, is pleased. "It appears to me that he gets it," he told me. "He understands the necessity for having an independent attorney general and an independent Department of Justice." Iglesias added that he liked "the fact that he's a former federal prosecutor. He understands that you have to build an absolute firewall from politics."

I'd "really be surprised if my colleagues hold different views from this," he added.