Barack Obama

Buying Obama Time, Congress Delays Rove Subpoena Deadline

Zachary Roth | January 30, 2009, 5:48PM

Justice delayed?

The House Judiciary committee has agreed to a request from Karl Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, to postpone the deadline by which Rove must respond to a subpoena issued by the committee.

Here's the letter sent by the committee, agreeing to Luskin's request and setting a new date of February 23 for Rove's testimony.

The hold-off serves the interests of the White House. The Obama administration is scheduled to file a brief on February 18 in the ongoing court case over the House's subpoena of two other senior Bush White House aides, Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten. At that time, it will likely indicate whether it intends to back President Bush's claim of retroactive executive privilege on behalf of his aides. So the committee's decision to agree to Luskin's request means the Obama administration has until then to formulate its position.

The ball, then, is still in Obama's court. And court is still exactly where the battle over Rove's testimony is most likely headed.

Barack Obama

Clinton Lawyer On Bush's Exec Privilege Claim: "There's Only One President At A Time"

Zachary Roth | January 30, 2009, 3:16PM

So does that letter Newsweek obtained, sent January 16 by the Bush White House to Karl Rove's lawyer, instructing Rove not to respond to any subpoenas that might be issued, change the state of play as to whether Rove will end up testifying on the US Attorneys firings? After all, President Bush is now on the record claiming the right to assert executive privilege even after leaving office.

Not according to Neil Eggleston, who specialized in executive privilege issues for President Clinton's White House. Eggleston told TPMmuckraker that, since President Obama has already issued an executive order that appears to take the view that a former president can't assert executive privilege, he's unlikely to back Bush's claim. And assuming things then wind up in court, Eggleston said he'd be very surprised if a court sided with Bush, ruling that executive privilege can be asserted retroactively.

"Remember what Obama kept saying during the transition: 'There's only one president at a time?'" asked Eggleston. "This is one where I think a court's going to decide there's only one president at a time."

Eggleston told TPMmuckraker last week that Obama's order seemed designed to help gain access to Bush White House documents and testimony that Congress has been seeking, including on the US Attorney firings matter.

Barack Obama

Newsweek Obtains Letter From Bush Lawyer, Asserting Retroactive Privilege

Zachary Roth | January 30, 2009, 9:52AM

Newsweek's Michael Isikoff has obtained the letter sent by White House counsel Fred Fielding to Karl Rove's lawyer Robert Luskin, just a few days before Bush left office, instructing Luskin that Rove "should not appear before Congress" in response to any subpoenas issued. The letter makes clear that Bush is continuing to assert a retrospective executive privilege over his White House years.

The Wall Street Journal had reported the existence of the letter -- which makes clear the lengths to wish the former president is wiling to go to keep a lid on what happened inside his White House -- earlier this week.

Earlier this week, the House Judiciary Committee issued a subpoena to Rove, ordering him to testify February 2 about the US Attorney firings, and the prosecution of ex Alabama governor Don Siegelman. Luskin told us he had forwarded the subpoena to the Obama White House, which must decide whether to back Bush's claim of retroactive privilege. If it doesn't, but Bush continues to assert it -- which it would appear from the letter he will -- the matter looks headed for the courts. There is no settled legal precedent to guide how a court might rule.

The Obama White House told Newsweek it's still studying the issue.

Fielding also sent a near identical letter to former White House counsel Harriet Miers, instructing her not to appear for a scheduled deposition in front of the Judiciary committee. The issue of whether Miers and another Bush White House aide, Josh Bolten, can testify is currently the subject of a court fight between the committee and the Bush White House.

The Obama White House is scheduled to file a brief in that case by February 18, in which it may make clear whether or not it intends to back Bush's executive privilege claim.

Barack Obama

Keying Off Obama, ACLU Asks For Bush Torture Memos

Zachary Roth | January 28, 2009, 12:13PM

Those directives issued by President Obama last week, reversing the Bush administration's policy of secrecy, have really shaken things up.

Earlier this week, the House Judiciary committee subponaed Karl Rove for testimony in the US Attorney firings matter. That move appears to have been in response to the Obama's moves, since Rove had long been claiming executive privilege backed by President Bush.

Now, McClatchy reports, the ACLU has asked the new administration to release Bush Justice Department memos justifying harsh interrogation methods, eavesdropping, and secret prisons.

The Bush administration had long refused to release them, citing national security concerns, among other things.

It's clear that Obama's moves -- specifically, his rescinding of a Bush DOJ memo that gave backing to agencies when they refused to disclose material, and his issuing of an executive order urging agencies to take a broader view of the Freedom of Information Act -- triggered the request.

"The president has made a very visible and clear commitment to transparency. We're eager to see that put into practice," an ACLU staffer told McClatchy.

Pro Publica has a rundown of the missing memos.

As McClatchy notes, Obama's nominee to head the Office of Legal Counsel, Dawn Johnsen, has written articles suggesting she thinks that in general, such memos should be released.

So this could be another set of crucial Bush records that will finally see the light of day.

Arlen Specter

Senate Committee Approves Holder

Zachary Roth | January 28, 2009, 11:42AM

Finally...

After weeks of delays, the Senate Judiciary committee has voted by 17-2 to send Eric Holder's nomination to the full Senate.

In a statement, committee chair Pat Leahy said:

Mr. Holder has demonstrated that he is committed to restoring the rule of law, and, as President Obama said in his inaugural address 'to reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals,'" said Leahy. "I am more convinced than ever that Eric Holder is a person who will reinvigorate the Department of Justice and serve ably as a key member of the President's national security team. He will pursue the Justice Department's vital missions with skill, integrity, independence and a commitment to the rule of law.

The two "no" votes were from conservative Republicans John Cornyn and Tom Coburn.

Leahy's full statement follows after the jump...

Read more »

Barack Obama

Gibbs: We're Mulling Rove Subpoena

Zachary Roth | January 27, 2009, 4:21PM

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was just asked at a briefing about Congress's subpoena, issued yesterday to Karl Rove, seeking his testimony on the US Attorneys firings.

Gibbs replied that the White House counsel's office "is studying those issues and will advise us when they have a recommendation."

As we reported earlier, the ball is now largely in President Obama's court as to whether Rove can continue to defy Congress's subpoena.

We'll keep you posted.

Arlen Specter

Specter Drops Opposition To Holder -- Leahy Pleased

Zachary Roth | January 27, 2009, 3:56PM

It looks like Arlen Specter, the ranking GOPer on the Senate Judiciary committee, has decided to support Eric Holder's nomination to be Attorney General after all, as Elana reports over at TPMDC.

Specter has put up roadblocks to Holder's confirmation from the start, first getting the hearings delayed a week, then getting the committee vote itself delayed another week, until tomorrow.

Here's a statement just put out by committee chairman Pat Leahy, who has led the fight to get Holder confirmed:

I am glad that Senator Specter has resolved his concerns and will support Eric Holder's nomination to be the next Attorney General. He joins the dozens of organizations and individuals across the political spectrum that for more than two months have praised the qualifications, integrity, and independence of this nominee. Tomorrow the Committee will move forward to report this historic nomination to the Senate, and I hope the Senate will debate and vote on Mr. Holder's nomination without further delay.

Barack Obama

Ball In Obama's Court On Rove's US Attorney Testimony

Zachary Roth | January 27, 2009, 1:04PM

On the question of whether we'll get to the bottom of the Bush White House's role in the US Attorney firings, it's starting to look more and more like the ball is squarely in President Obama's court.

Yesterday, as we noted, House Judiciary chair John Conyers issued a subpoena to Karl Rove, ordering him to testify about the affair February 2nd and declaring ominously: "It's time for him to talk."

(Rove, making a claim to executive privilege backed by President Bush, had defied a subpoena issued by the last Congress. That Congress ended before the full House could vote on contempt charges against Rove.)

And just now, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, told TPMmuckraker that he had already forwarded Conyers' subpoena to the Obama White House, asking them to give an opinion as to whether President Bush retains his ability to assert executive privilege.

In other words, the Obama White House will decide, essentially, whether to back Rove's claim of privilege, or to deny it. (And given that Rove is supposed to appear February 2, that decision from the White House should come soon.) In the latter case, said Luskin, a negotiation would ensue between the Obama White House, President Bush, and Rove. That would likely result in the matter going to court.

That's not the only strand of the effort to uncover information about the firings on which Obama will likely have a major say. Conyers is also seeking testimony on the matter from former White House officials Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten, who, like Rove, are relying on Bush to claim executive privilege. That case is in court, and the Obama White House is scheduled to file an appeal brief February 18th. That brief may make clear whether it backs the privilege claim for Miers and Bolten, and could help determine the case.

Obama's executive order on presidential records, issued last week, suggests that his White House believes that former presidents do not retain their right to assert executive privilege. But that doesn't mean it's a sure thing that Obama won't uphold Rove's claim, and/or Miers and Bolten's. Either way, we should soon find out.

John Conyers

Conyers to Rove: Time to Talk About US Attorneys

Zachary Roth | January 26, 2009, 6:25PM

Last week, we talked to a number of experts who said that President Obama's executive order on presidential records might well affect the ongoing effort to get information about the Bush White House's role in the US Attorney firings.

And it looks like John Conyers is of the same mind. The House Judiciary chair this afternoon issued a subpoena to Karl Rove to testify before the committee on February 2.

Rove had claimed immunity from an earlier Conyers-issued subpoena, citing executive privilege. As a press release accompanying today's subpoena points out, "[t]hat "absolute immunity" position was supported by then-President Bush, but it has been rejected by U.S. District Judge John Bates and President Obama has previously dismissed the claim as 'completely misguided.'"

In other words, although Obama's order on records directly addressed only the question of a former president's material docuement -- not testimony from his aides -- there's reason to think that the principle of openness over secrecy that Obama has outlined both in the order and elsewhere could strengthen Conyers' position on this issue.

Said Conyers:

I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court, and today's action is an important step along the way. Change has come to Washington, and I hope Karl Rove is ready for it. After two years of stonewalling, it's time for him to talk.

We'll be watching this very closely...

Alberto Gonzales

Gonzo: They Won't Prosecute Me For Torture

Zachary Roth | January 26, 2009, 3:37PM

Lately, there's been rampant speculation that Bush administration officials might face prosecution under Obama for ordering or approving torture. But it looks like Alberto Gonzales isn't sweating it.

In an interview with NPR, written up by the Chicago Tribune, Gonzo was asked about the issue. His response:

I don't think that there's going to be a prosecution, quite frankly. Because again, these activities.... They were authorized, they were supported by legal opinions at the Department of Justice.

In his confirmation hearings to be Attorney General, Eric Holder declared flatly that "water-boarding is torture," a determination that could leave key Bush officials, not least Gonzales, facing legal jeopardy -- though President Obama has expressed a desire to "look forward as opposed to looking backwards."

A special prosecutor ha also been appointed to look into whether DOJ officials committed crimes in connection with the US Attorney firings of 2006. And there have been some signs that the probe is circling Gonzo.

Securities and Exchange Commission

No More Madoffs: Schumer, Shelby Want Beefed Up Efforts to Combat Financial Fraud

Zachary Roth | January 22, 2009, 2:24PM

The wages of Madoff continue to grow...

A new bill being introduced by Senators Chuck Schumer and Richard Shelby would aim to crack down on financial fraud by adding hundreds of new prosecutors and investigators to the Department of Justice -- including the FBI -- and the Securities and Exchange Commission, at a cost of $110 million.

A press release explains:

In recent months, amid the financial crisis that has roiled the U.S. economy, a rising number of securities and accounting fraud cases have surfaced, accounting for billions of dollars in losses for investors. But the agencies on the front lines of policing the Wall Street's top financial institutions and investment managers have been hamstrung by a lack of resources.

And it quotes Schumer:

Our white collar crime divisions are under-staffed, under-funded, and overwhelmed," Schumer said. "When a wave of violent crime sweeps through a city, the immediate response is to beef up the police forces, putting more cops on the beat, extending overtime, and making sure the city returns to safety. Our reaction to the financial crisis and the massive and complex financial fraud investigations that loom should be no different.

In recent weeks, there has been talk of re-structuring the financial regulatory system, of which the SEC is a major pillar, in response to the current financial crisis. So we'll see how this new effort fits in.

Read more »

Arlen Specter

GOPers, Worried About Torture Prosecutions, Delay Holder Vote

Zachary Roth | January 21, 2009, 4:20PM

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary committee are delaying for up to a week a vote on Eric Holder's nomination to be Attorney General, with some saying they want more time to consider his record on torture.

John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, told Politico:

Part of my concern relates to his statements at the hearing with regard to torture and what his intentions are toward our intelligence personnel who were operating in good faith based on their understanding of what the law was.

Holder declared last week at the hearing that "water-boarding is torture."

It seems plausible that Cornyn's and other GOPers' concern might relate not just to intel personnel who carried out torture, but also to high-ranking Bush administration officials who ordered or approved it.

In a statement, committee chair Pat Leahy expressed his displeasure:

I am extremely disappointed, but they have that right, and this historic - historic - nomination is held over.

John Yoo

Impressive New Team Taking Shape For DOJ

Zachary Roth | January 21, 2009, 12:36PM

It's good to see that the grownups are back in charge at the Justice Department.

Even before the Senate has voted on Eric Holder's nomination to be Attorney General, the department is filling up with respected legal figures whose records suggest an intention to use DOJ as America's law firm, not the president's.

Neal Katyal, the Georgetown Law professor who successfully challenged the military trials in Guantanamo while representing Osama bin Laden's driver, will be deputy solicitor general. He'll join Elena Kagan, the dean of Harvard Law School, who has been nominated to be Solicitor General.

Meanwhile, Katyal's Georgetown colleague Marty Lederman -- known to the blogosphere from his writing at the legal blog Balkanization -- will return to the Office of Legal Counsel as deputy assistant Attorney General. With his record of opposition to warrantless wiretapping and torture, Lederman figures to represent quite a change -- for the better -- from another recent OLC lawyer, torture-memo author John Yoo.

Lederman will work with Dawn Johnsen, an Indiana University law professor and vocal critic of Bush terror policies, who's been nominated to head the OLC, as well as David Barron, who will serve as the principal deputy. Both Johnsen and Barron served at OLC during the Clinton administration.

Add to that the news that fired US Attorney David Iglesias will be prosecuting Guantanamo cases as a military prosecutor, and you get the impression that on issues of justice, many of the wrongs of the Bush years are in the process of being righted.

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...

Dick Cheney

Judge Takes Cheney's Word That He'll Hand Over Records

Zachary Roth | January 20, 2009, 3:09PM

Dick Cheney may now be the former vice president, but a court ruling handed down yesterday, his last full day in office, could make it less likely that we'll ever get a full account of his role in crucial Bush administration decisions.

The Washington Post reports that a federal judge decided that a pledge from Cheney's office that it will turn over key records to the National Archives, as required by law, is good enough. A coalition of historical and nonprofit groups, alleging that Cheney planned to discard or destroy the records, had sued to require that they be preserved.

Claire O'Donnell, a Cheney aide who handles record-keeping, had said in a sworn deposition that the material would be preserved, and Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said she expects that the VP's office "will, in good faith, comply with" that pledge.

But the plaintiffs are concerned that it won't. Stanley Kutler, an emeritus professor of history and law at the University of Wisconsin Law School, and the author of two books on Watergate, told the Post he's afraid that "when the Archives goes to open Cheney's papers, they are going to find empty boxes."

Kutler added that Cheney "spent most of his time making sure he left no footprints. Why did he fight this order so much if he did not have the intent to leave with these papers? I'm guessing that a lot of it will not be there."

Still, on most of the more far-reaching issues in play, the government lost. The court rejected the government's arguments that the plaintiffs lacked standing, and that no court could review the administration's compliance with the Presidential Records Act, under which the case was brought. It also rejected the strange-sounding claim that that act gave the vice president complete discretion to decide how to comply with it. Judge Kollar-Kotelly rapped DOJ for making "constantly shifting arguments."

But on the immediate -- and crucial -- question of the how much of the ex-veep's records are made available to those writing the history of the Bush administration, we may have to trust Dick Cheney. And that hasn't tended to work out too well in the past.

Bradley Schlozman

Berry: Tanner's "Supposed Apology" Is "Even Funnier"

Zachary Roth | January 16, 2009, 10:28AM

Mary Frances Berry, the target of a racist "joke" by then-DOJ voting-rights chief John Tanner, has responded to the insult, and to Tanner's credulity-straining semi-apology.

Berry, the former chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights, spoke Wednesday at a legal conference held by the American Constituion Society, entitled: "The Road from Lincoln to Obama: The Constitution and the New Birth of Freedom."

She began her remarks like this:

Welcome. Today I have to tell you that even though I am black, I am not bitter. (Scattered laughter).

Bitter some of the time, but not here.

And I would tell you that the guy who made the comments sent me an email last night, in a supposed apology, which is even funnier, but I won't take up the time.

Here's the video:

According to a Justice Department report released this week, Tanner told a colleague over email that he liked his coffee "Mary Frances Berry style -- black and bitter."

Seems like the right way for Berry to play it.

Chuck Schumer

Schumer On Tanner's Racist Email: "Shocking"

Zachary Roth | January 15, 2009, 3:03PM

In a move that piqued our interest here at TPMmuckraker, Sen. Schumer, during his questioning of Eric Holder, cited the racist email sent by John Tanner, who was at the time the head of the voting rights section, about Mary Frances Berry, the then-chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights.

Schumer called the statement "all the more shocking becasue it's a supervisor in the civil rights division who said this."

Tanner sent a letter of apology to Berry earlier this week.

Here's the video:

Alberto Gonzales

Schumer To Holder: You and Obama Are "Both Very Handsome"

Zachary Roth | January 15, 2009, 2:48PM

Ok, so that headline wasn't really on point. But now that you're reading...

In his questioning of Eric Holder this morning, Sen. Chuck Schumer really doubled down on the theme of politicization at DOJ under Alberto Gonzales -- a theme that, as we noted, has served as the constant backdrop to the hearings so far.

Schumer declared that "the likes of Alberto Gonzales and Bradley Schlozman sullied and demoralized a great legal institution, probably the finest civil service institution in the country, that they really dragged through the mud.

As for GOP efforts to suggest Holder could act similarly, Schumer called the comparisons "ludicrous," then initiated the following clever and enlightening exchange to demonstrate Holder's comparative independence:

Schumer: As I look at your background and your record, it's clear that you are less connected and less beholden to the new president than most attorneys general in the last fifty years. Let's review for the moment. I have a few quick questions for you.

Have you ever been President-Elect Obama's personal lawyer, like William French Smith had been for years for Ronald Reagan?

Holder: No, I have not.

Schumer: Have you ever been a staffer for Barack Obama, like Ed Meese had been for Reagan?

Holder: No, I have not, senator.

Schumer: Have you ever served as official counsel to Barack Obama, like Alberto Gonzales had for George Bush?

Holder: No, I have not, senator.

Schumer: And has Barack Obama ever dispatched you to the hospital room of a sick government official, to get him to authorize an illegal wiretap program?

Holder: No, he has not.

Schumer: Yeah I didn't think so. Alright, and I take it you're not a close relation to the new president, like Bobby Kennedy was to Jack Kennedy?

Holder: No, we're not related by blood though people to say we look alike.

Schumer: I don't think so. Although you're both very handsome.

Holder: I'd heard he's handsome and was going to try to draft on that.

Schumer: OK, let me ask you this, have you ever been a professional politician like John Ashcroft or Dick Thornburgh?

Holder: No, I've never run for office.

Here's the video of the exchange:

John Tanner

Tanner Sends Letter To Berry Apologizing For Racist Email

Zachary Roth | January 15, 2009, 1:31PM

So you'll remember that on Tuesday, a DOJ report found that John Tanner, the former chief of the department's voting rights section, had told a colleague over email in 2004 that he liked his coffee "Mary Frances Berry style -- black and bitter." Berry, an African-American, was at the time the chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights.

Now Tanner is trying to make amends. Moments ago he forwarded to TPMmuckraker a letter of apology he sent to Berry dated January 13.

Tanner -- who has a history of questionable racial remarks and appears still to be working on voting issues on DOJ's payroll -- explains that he only used the phrase because he had recently heard an African-American customer at a coffee shop order coffee "black and sweet -- like me."

Still, he says, it was "a very poor choice of words," "flippant" and "ill-considered."

Then -- in kind of a stretch -- he further explains: "The term bitter, of course, meant no sugar in the coffee, and was not meant as a reflection on you or your attitude towards a challenging situation."

And Tanner adds: "I am well aware of your many significant contributions to our country's racial equality and justice."

See the full letter here.

Alberto Gonzales

Holder: "I Will Review That Determination" Not To Prosecute Schlozman

Zachary Roth | January 15, 2009, 12:19PM

Not that it's likely, but Brad Schlozman may want to hope that Eric Holder's confirmation somehow gets derailed.

That's because Holder just told the Senate Judiciary committee that he wants to reconsider the Bush Justice Department's curious decision not to bring criminal charges against Schlozman, a former top department official who was found by a DOJ investigation to have politicized hiring decisions, then lied about it to Congress in an effort to cover it up.

Asked about the issue moments ago by Sen. Dianne Feinstein -- one of the lawmakers to whom Schlozman was found to have given an untruthful answer during testimony -- Holder declared: "I want to know why the determination was made not to pursue charges."

Here's his answer in full:

I understand that prosecutors in the US attorney's office in DC -- again, just based on the press reports, actually reviewed the report and then made a prosecutive determination.

If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed as Attorney General, I will indicate to you that I will review that determination. I don't know all the facts of the case, but given the findings in the Inspector General's report that are consistent with what you have said, I want to know why the determination was made not to pursue charges, criminal charges.

Asked by Feinstein about the report's findings more broadly, Holder responded:

I have not had a chance to read the report, Senator, and yet I have read the news accounts of it. What's contained in the report is very disturbing. The notion that the Justice Department would ever take into account a person's political affiliation or political beliefs in making hiring decisions is antithetical to everything the department stands for and everything I'm familiar with.

I served very proudly in the Justice Department, under Republican Attorneys General, Democratic Attorneys General, and it was never a thought given to what your party affiliation was, what your political beliefs were in hiring, in promotion decisions. What we have seen in that report I think is aberrant, but is also I think one of the major tasks the next Attorney General is going to have to do. You have to reverse that.

So we may not have seen the last word on this.

Late Update:
Here's video of the exchange between Feinstein and Holder about Schlozman:

Bradley Schlozman

DOJ Kept Tanner Working On Voting Rights -- Even After Racist Comments

Zachary Roth | January 14, 2009, 11:23AM

Yesterday we picked out a shocking excerpt from the DOJ report on politicized hiring, in which then-Voting Rights chief John Tanner told Brad Schlozman over email in 2004 that he liked his coffee "Mary Frances Berry style -- black and bitter." Berry, an African-American, was at the time the chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights, which works, among other things, to protect Americans' right to vote.

As we noted, this wasn't the first known case of Tanner making racially insensitive remarks. He left the voting-rights section soon after sparking a furor by saying that voter ID laws discriminate against the elderly, and therefore not against African-Americans, because African-Americans die younger.

But it turns out that Tanner didn't stop working on voting issues for DOJ -- he just found a new perch from which to do it. After a short stint with the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices, he showed up again last April working on election-related issues for the Alabama Law Institute, and still being paid by the Justice Department under a federal program, the Associated Press reported at the time. (Thanks to reader Ally for the catch.)

What exactly has Tanner been working on? Says AP:

At the institute, his work will include writing about getting Justice Department approval of city annexations and new boundaries for political districts, such as legislative districts.

In other words, DOJ's response to the outrage provoked by Tanner's racist comments was to ... send him to Alabama to help with the racially charged work of redrawing political districts. Great idea!

Is the department still paying Tanner's salary today? DOJ's press office didn't immediately get back to us on that, claiming it didn't have access to the information right away.

But it looks like the answer is yes. According to that AP story from April:

[Tanner] is participating in the federal government's program to loan personnel to other government agencies. The Justice Department is paying Tanner's salary and benefits to be in Alabama through next spring.

We reached Tanner at the Law Institute. When we said we were from TPM, he told us he'd call us back, but hasn't yet.

George Bush

Conyers Wants Criminal Probe Of Bush Officials' Wrongdoing

Zachary Roth | January 14, 2009, 9:41AM

Over the weekend, President-Elect Obama said we should "look forward as opposed to looking backwards" on the question of prosecuting Bush administration officials for torture, illegal wiretapping, and other possible crimes committed in the name of national security.

But yesterday, the House Judiciary committee got behind a very different approach, releasing a nearly 500-page report that recommends establishing a blue-ribbon commission -- along the lines of the 9/11 commission, but with subpoena power -- to investigate whether crimes were committed. (Last week, as we reported over at Election Central, Judiciary chair John Conyers and nine other lawmakers introduced a bill to set up such a commission.)

The report also advocates an investigation by the Justice Department, potentially involving a special prosecutor. And in addition to focusing on issues of torture, wiretapping, and the like, the report also recommends continuing to probe matters like the leaking of the name of former CIA agent Valerie Plame, and the US Attorney firings.

It'll be interesting to see how Democrats will reconcile Conyers' aggressive stance, which seems to enjoy broad support among the party's base, with Obama's more cautious approach.

Bradley Schlozman

No Complaints Filed Against Schlozman in Kansas

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 4:13PM

It looks like Bradley Schlozman will escape prosecution, at least for now, despite having been found in a DOJ report to have broken the law by politicizing hiring decisions at the department, and then lying about it to a Senate committee.

But a flood of readers has written in to ask whether Schloz might still be disbarred in the state of Kansas, where he's currently practicing law.

So we called the state's disciplinary administrator, who would handle the issue. Stanton Hazlett told TPMmuckraker that Schlozman has been registered in the state since 1994, but no complaints about him have been filed.

Indeed, Hazlett at first said he wasn't familiar with Schlozman's name, and asked us to send him the DOJ's report released this morning. Eventually, he said that he did recall the allegations of politicized hiring, but wasn't aware that Schlozman had lied to Congress about it. Unsurprisingly, Hazlett suggested that he would take such a matter very seriously.

We'll keep you posted on any developments...

Late Update: The Washington Post reports:

Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine and Office of Professional Responsibility chief H. Marshall Jarrett said they would refer their findings to legal disciplinary authorities.

According to one TPMmuckraker source: "DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility routinely refers findings of ethics violations by Justice Department lawyers to the state bar associations in states where that lawyer is licensed to practice".

So perhaps those complaints will soon start coming in.

House Judiciary

Judge: White House Must Pass On US Attorney Documents to Obama Admin.

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 2:27PM

Good news for those still hoping we'll get to the bottom of the White House's role in the US Attorney firings.

The Associated Press reports:

A federal judge says the incoming administration of Barack Obama must be given copies of documents the Bush White House has been withholding from Congress on the firings of nine U.S. attorneys.

The order by U.S. District Judge John Bates is a minor victory for the House Judiciary Committee.

...

The House committee was concerned that the documents would no longer be readily available once they were shipped to the National Archives when President George W. Bush leaves office on Jan. 20.

The White House has refused to provide the crucial documents, which were subpoenaed by Rep. John Conyers' Judiciary committee. In addition, Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, and Josh Bolten - all senior White House officials at the time of the firings, have so far defied subpoenas issued by the committee.

Alberto Gonzales

Leahy: Schloz Committed "Heinous Crime"

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 2:03PM

It sounds like Sen. Pat Leahy isn't too happy about the US Attorney's office's decision not to prosecute Bradley Schlozman for making false statements to Leahy's Judiciary committee.

In a speech on the Senate floor this morning, Leahy left no doubt that he disagrees with the US Attorney's office's decision, and declared: "When somebody deliberately, purposely sets out to subvert the constitution of the United States, and then lies about it, lies about it, Mr. President, I find that a heinous crime."

You can watch the speech here, but here's the entire relevant excerpt:

I really wish that the current U.S. attorney's office appointed by this administration had prosecuted. I think that the only way you stop such blatant criminal violations by people who know better, people who are sworn to uphold the law, (unint.) that they know they'll go to jail for breaking the law. That's what should have been done. And just because they broke the law in the Bush administration and the Bush administration did not, or deemed not to prosecute, I think that raises real questions. Prosecution should be done no matter who breaks the law. I think about one of the people who testified that same investigation and said that, uh, "we swear an oath to President George Bush." I said, "no, you swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. That constitution is the constitution you're sworn to uphold and I'm sworn to uphold and it's the constitution that reflects all Americans."

...

And when somebody deliberately, purposely sets out to subvert the constitution of the United States, and then lies about it, lies about it, Mr. President, I find that a heinous crime. We will see some kid who steals a car, they'll be prosecuted as they probably should. But when you have a key member of the DoJ lie about it under oath, who subverts the consitution of the United States, all the more reason to prosecute that person. Mr. President what Mr. Schlozman did was reprehensible, it was disgusting, it was wrong, goes at the very core of America's principles. The distinguished presiding officer, like me, had the great opportunity to serve as a prosecutor, and I have every reason to believe that he did not show fear of favor when he brought prosecution, as I did, as I did not, I did not show fear of favor, most prosecutors do not. And when you have somebody who is part of the Justice Department lie under oath, and do it in a way to cover up subverting the laws that protect all of us, the civil rights laws protect all of us, white, black, brown, no matter what our race, our creed, it protects all of us. And what has marked this country since the time I was a young lawyer in the sixties, is our adherence to the civil rights laws. You can't go back to a time where they're enforced for some but not for others.

Arlen Specter

Leahy On Specter: "It May Be Coincidence That His Positions Have Been Those Of Karl Rove"

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 1:24PM

On a conference call this morning, Sen. Pat Leahy was asked about his ongoing spat with ranking GOPer Arlen Specter over the nomination of Eric Holder to be Attorney General -- which Leahy supports and Specter has expressed extreme skepticism about.

In response, Leahy upped the rhetoric, saying of Specter:

It may be coincidence that his positions have been those of Karl Rove. I suspect it is coincidence.

Leahy added:

He was a lead supporter in the US Senate of Alberto Gonzales. I disagreed with him on Alberto Gonzales. If he could support Gonzales, who turned out to be a disaster as Attorney General and was eventually forced out by President Bush, I would think that he would be very happy to support Eric Holder.

Bradley Schlozman

Top DOJer Called Voting-Rights Official "Black and Bitter"

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 1:00PM

This might be the most horrifying excerpt from the Schlozman report:

In that incident in August 2004, Voting Section Chief John Tanner sent an e-mail to Schlozman asking Schlozman to bring coffee for him to a meeting both were scheduled to attend. Schlozman replied asking Tanner how he liked his coffee. Tanner's response was, "Mary Frances Berry style - black and bitter." Berry is an African-American who was the Chairperson of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights from November 1993 until late 2004. Schlozman forwarded the e-mail chain to several Department officials (including Principal DAAG Bradshaw) but not Acosta, with the comment, "Y'all will appreciate Tanner's response." Acosta said that when he was made aware of the incident, he required Schlozman to make a written apology to him for his role in forwarding the e-mail and that Schlozman did so.

Tanner, as longtime readers will remember, was the guy who left the voting-rights section soon after saying that voter ID laws discriminate against the elderly, and therefore not against African-Americans, because African-Americans die younger.

We've contacted both Berry and Tanner to get their reactions...

Alberto Gonzales

Why No Charges For Schlozman?

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 12:33PM

Given that the DOJ Inspector General's report found that Bradley Schlozman broke the law in making politicized hiring decisions, and lied about it to Congress, why and how did the US Attorney's office make the decision to decline to bring criminal charges?

We got a bit more information on that question from Patricia Riley, special counsel to the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, which conducted the investigation.

Riley told TPMmuckraker that her office was only asked by the Inspector General's office to look into the possible perjury charges stemming from Schlozman's congressional testimony, rather than the underlying hiring decisions. She said that six career prosecutors, with between 10 and 21 years experience, conducted the investigation, reporting to Assistant US Attorney Channing Phillips (US Attorney Jeffrey Taylor recused himself from the probe).

The investigation continued until last Friday, said Riley, and included interviews with witnesses who were not contacted by the IG's report. Based on that investigation, a decision was made not to bring criminal charges.

Riley declined to say what specific information uncovered in that probe determined the decision.

We also asked the office of Sen. Pat Leahy, when they first learned that the OIG report had found that Schlozman lied to Leahy's committee. A spokeswoman responded in an email:

We received this IG report this morning, shortly in advance of the hearing, as is the usual practice of the IG's office.

Alberto Gonzales

Schloz: Voting Section Attorneys Are "Mold Spores"

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 11:12AM

Here's another great Schlozman line from the report:

For example, in an e-mail on July 15, 2003, to a former colleague, Schlozman wrote, "I too get to work with mold spores, but here in Civil Rights, we call them Voting Section attorneys."

As part of the same e-mail exchange, on July 16, 2003, Schlozman wrote, "My tentative plans are to gerrymander all of those crazy libs rights out of the section."

Alberto Gonzales

Schloz Broke Law, But Won't Face Criminal Charges

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 11:09AM

In case you were wondering about why the Schlozman report is dated July 2 2008 but was only released today, see this excerpt from page one:

We referred the findings from our investigation to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia in March 2008. We completed this written report of investigation in July 2008.

The U.S. Attorney's Office informed us on January 9, 2009, of its decision to decline prosecution of Schlozman. The Interim U.S. Attorney, Jeffrey Taylor, was recused from the matter and the decision.

We are now releasing our July 2008 report of investigation...

In other words, although the report found that Schlozman broke the law and lied to the Senate about it, he won't face criminal charges.

We've called the US Attorney's office to find out more about that decision.

Alberto Gonzales

Schloz Ripped "Psychopathic Left-Wing Organization Designed To Overthrow The Government"

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 11:02AM

Here's a voicemail message Schlozman left in February 2006 for a colleague:

[W]hen we start asking about, "what is your commitment to civil rights?" . . . . [H]ow do you prove that? Usually by membership in some crazy liberal organization or by some participation in some crazy cause. . . . Look, look at my résumé - I didn't have any demonstrated commitment, but I care about the issues. So, I mean, I just want to make sure we don't start confining ourselves to, you know, politburo members because they happen to be a member of some, you know, psychopathic left-wing organization designed to overthrow the government.

Alberto Gonzales

DOJ: "Schlozman Deviated From Strict Standard"

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 10:48AM

Peter Carr, a DOJ spokesman, released the following statement in response to the report on politicized hiring:

Today's report describes troubling conduct by a former supervisor in the Civil Rights Division prior to his departure from the Division nearly three years ago. The mission of the Justice Department is the evenhanded application of the Constitution and the laws enacted under it, and that mission has to start with the evenhanded application of the laws within our own Department. As today's report makes clear, Mr. Schlozman deviated from that strict standard.

The Department agrees with the recommendations outlined in the report and has already taken steps to implement them. In addition, the Civil Rights Division has taken additional steps to update its own hiring policies and to increase the role of career employees in its hiring process. As a result of these reforms, and the procedures already in place for evaluating the work and conduct of lawyers throughout the Department, we are confident that the institutional problems identified in today's report no longer exist and will not recur.

Alberto Gonzales

Leahy On Report: Schlozman Lied To Me

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 10:44AM

Pat Leahy, the chair of the Senate Judiciary committee, just put out the following statement on the DOJ report into politicized hiring:

Today's report confirms some of our worst fears about the Bush administration's political corruption of the Justice Department. Not only did senior Republican appointees violate the law in hiring based on politics in the Civil Rights Division, they also lied about it when called to explain themselves to Congress.

I am particularly disturbed about the findings that a senior Justice Department appointee, Bradley Schlozmann, made false statements under oath when appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Lying to Congress undermines the very core of our constitutional principles and blunts the American people's right to open and transparent government. Not only did he lie to me and the Committee, but he then refused to cooperate with Justice Department's internal oversight offices' investigation into illegal hiring practices in the Department's Civil Rights Division. The clear determination that he broke the law corrodes our trust in our system of justice and in the nation's top law enforcement agency. His actions in fact undermine the very mission of the Department's Civil Rights Division, which is charged with enforcing federal law prohibiting discrimination.

A strong and independent Civil Rights Division has long been crucial to the enforcement of our precious civil rights laws, and experienced and committed career attorneys have always been the heart and soul of that Division. Contrary to those traditions, however, this report details troubling revelations of political appointees who marginalize and force out career lawyers because of ideology, and, corrupt the hiring process for career positions. It should come as no surprise that the result, and of course the intent, of this political makeover of the Civil Rights Division has been a dismal civil rights enforcement record.

This report is just one of the final chapters in the regrettable legacy of the Bush administration at Main Justice, and it reinforces the need for new leadership. Now more than ever, it is necessary to confirm a new team to lead the Justice Department, starting with Attorney General designee Eric Holder.

Alberto Gonzales

Report: Schlozman Broke The Law, Then Tried To Hide It From Senate

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 10:39AM

Here's the key excerpt, finding that Schlozman broke the law by considering political affiliations in making hiring decisions, and made false statement about it to the Senate:

The evidence in our investigation showed that Schlozman, first as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General and subsequently as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General, considered political and ideological affiliations in hiring career attorneys and in other personnel actions affecting career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division. In doing so, he violated federal law - the Civil Service Reform Act - and Department policy that prohibit discrimination in federal employment based on political and ideological affiliations, and committed misconduct. The evidence also showed that Division managers failed to exercise sufficient oversight to ensure that Schlozman did not engage in inappropriate hiring and personnel practices.

Moreover, Schlozman made false statements about whether he considered political and ideological affiliations when he gave sworn testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee and in his written responses to supplemental questions from the Committee. Schlozman is no longer employed by the Department and, therefore, is not subject to disciplinary action by the Department. We recommend, however, that, if criminal prosecution is declined these findings be considered if Schlozman seeks federal employment in the
future. We believe that his violations of the merit system principles set forth in the Civil Service Reform Act, federal regulations, and Department policy, and his subsequent false statements to Congress render him unsuitable for federal service.

Alberto Gonzales

DOJ Releases Report On Politicized Hiring

Zachary Roth | January 13, 2009, 10:31AM

The Justice Department's Inspector General has just released a report on politicized hiring at the Civil Rights division, focused on TPMmuckraker favorite Bradley Schlozman.

It's here.

More soon...

Alberto Gonzales

DOJ Official Caught Up In US Attorney Firings Supports Holder

Zachary Roth | January 12, 2009, 1:11PM

We're not sure whether this counts as a positive thing ... but Eric Holder, Barack Obama's nominee for Attorney General, has won the support of a former DOJ official who was seriously tainted by the US Attorney firings scandal.

In a letter obtained by Politico, former deputy AG Paul McNulty wrote that despite the issues raised by some GOPers about Holder's tenure at DOJ under Bill Clinton, he nonetheless deserved support:

When Eric Holder was Deputy Attorney General, he encountered a daily barrage of complex issues and demands," McNulty wrote. "His challenge was to exercise sound judgment, often within severely limited time constraints. As a result, it should come as no surprise that Eric can now look back and wish that he had handled some things differently. What is important, however, is that he remains the same person of high integrity, and through it all, he is far better prepared to lead the Department of Justice.

While serving as deputy AG under Alberto Gonzales, McNulty was involved in an effort to keep details of the US Attorneys firing scheme from Congress. And his chief of staff, Michael Elston, told IG investigators for a separate inquiry that he looked for GOP or conservative credentials when making hiring decisions for McNulty's office.

So McNulty's endorsement may not be the one of which Holder is most proud. Still, Pat Leahy's comment to TPM that, depsite Arlen Specter's anti-Holder crusade, there was in fact significant Republican support for Holder's nomination, appears to be being borne out.

Arlen Specter

Senate Releases Witness List For Holder Hearings

Zachary Roth | January 9, 2009, 6:13PM

The Senate Judiciary committee has released its witness list for the confirmation hearings of Attorney General nominee Eric Holder, to begin Thursday:

The list:

The Honorable John W. Warner, Former United States Senator from Virginia
The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton, Congresswoman from the District of Columbia

Panel I:
Eric H. Holder, Jr.

Panel II:
The Honorable Louis J. Freeh, Former Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Chuck Canterbury, National President, Fraternal Order of Police
John Payton, President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

Witness to be designated by the Minority
Witness to be designated by the Minority

It'll be interesting to see who Arlen Specter and friends decide to call, since they've signaled a desire to scrutinize Holder's record -- in particular his role in the Marc Rich pardon -- very closely.

Justice Department

Leahy: GOPers Tell Me They Won't Oppose Holder -- Despite Specter's Bluster

Zachary Roth and Elana Schor | January 8, 2009, 2:43PM

In that same conversation with Senate Judiciary chair Pat Leahy, we also asked about the bizarre jab recently thrown by Leahy's Republican counterpart on the committee, Arlen Specter, who likened Attorney General nominee Eric Holder to Alberto Gonzales.

Leahy shook his head, almost amusedly, and said "a number of Republicans" have told him privately that "there's no way we could vote against Eric Holder -- there's no way we could explain it."

In other words, Specter's apparent crusade against Holder may turn out to be a lonelier effort than it might appear.

U.S. Attorneys

Leahy Unsure About Timeframe For US Attorneys Probe

Zachary Roth and Elana Schor | January 8, 2009, 2:28PM

We just talked to Senate Judiciary chair Patrick Leahy (D-VT) as he left the official electoral vote count that designated the president-elect, and asked him something that's been on our mind here at TPMmuckraker: How much resources/time will Congress have to address the ongoing lawsuits against Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten for their failure to provide testimony and documents in the U.S. Attorney firings scandal?

The House officially voted to continue its legal efforts yesterday, but Leahy admitted that he was unsure about a timeframe for action in the Senate.

"I don't know," he said. "I actually raised the same question to my staff today."

Leahy explained that several senior members of his staff have taken a leave to help with Barack Obama's transition, a factor that could delay significant action for a time.

In October, Leahy's committee released a report on the firings saga which found that senior White House officials, including Karl Rove, helped compile the list of US Attorneys to be removed, and that former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales participated in a "cover up" to conceal the fact that the firings were politically motivated.

That report accompanied contempt resolutions, against Rove and White House chief of staff Josh Bolten, passed by the committee last year. Rove and Bolten have refused to testify or turn over documents to the committee.

Justice Department

DOJ Still Hounding Wiretap Whistleblower

Zachary Roth | January 8, 2009, 1:30PM

The Bush DOJ may not usually be inclined to hold its own members accountable for criminal wrongdoing. But when the alleged wrong-doing consists of embarrassing the administration by revealing the existence of a program that was illegally spying on the American people, the wheels of justice seem to start turning.

Last month, as we noted at the time, Newsweek unmasked the man, Thomas Tamm, who leaked to the New York Times the news that the NSA had been conducting a secret wiretapping program that was being concealed from the FISA court.

And as the magazine reported, Tamm, who spoke on the record to Newsweek for its story, has been in federal law enforcement's sights thanks to his fateful decision.

Now, DOJ has written a letter to his lawyer -- obtained by Salon's Glenn Greenwald -- asking whether, in light of his decision to speak to Newsweek, Tamm "is willing to reconsider his prior refusal to speak with agents of the FBI and/or to testify before the Grand Jury regarding his knowledge of and/or participation in the disclosure of TSP-related information to [James] Risen, Mr. Lichtblau and others."

(Risen and Lichtblau, of course, are the New York Times reporters who first reported on the program, based on Tamm's leak.)

The letter, signed by Steven Tyrrell, the chief of DOJ's fraud section, continues with what appears to be a veiled threat to subpoeana Tamm:

if I do not hear from you by [January 7], I will assume that Mr. Tamm is not interested in submitting to a voluntary interview or testifying before the Grand Jury.

In its report last month, Newsweek wrote that federal agents have "pursued [Tamm] relentlessly for the past two and a half years ... raided his house, hauled away personal possessions and grilled his wife, a teenage daughter and a grown son. More recently, they've been questioning Tamm's friends and associates about nearly every aspect of his life."

That pursuit appears to be continuing -- even as the department declines to bring charges against anyone in connection with the illegal program itself that Tamm revealed.

Justice Department

Mukasey Laments "Politically Influenced Functioning" At DOJ

Zachary Roth | January 8, 2009, 11:48AM

Attorney General Michael Mukasey gave his sendoff speech yesterday, and, after the usual boilerplate -- "pleasure to work alongside a group of the most talented legal professionals anyone could ever hope to work with..." -- he made reference to the department's politicization under the Bush administration.

From Mukasey's prepared remarks:

As I suggested a few moments ago, not all of the news over the last 14 months was good news. We heard allegations, and saw revelations, of politically influenced functioning within the Department, principally in hiring, and of other deviations from established procedures and acceptable professional standards. Thankfully, we can draw a measure of satisfaction even from these painful episodes. After all, many of the revelations and solutions came from within the Department itself. And, in those cases where investigations have been warranted, the Department has shown that it is capable of conducting the necessary review of the conduct and practices of its own people and of others.

We have also responded to these troubling allegations by changing policies and procedures. We instituted rules that limit contact between the Department and the White House on ongoing cases; we restored the role of career lawyers in making hiring decisions in the Honors and Summer Law Intern Programs; and we took steps to ensure that hiring and recruitment decisions throughout the Department take place on the merits, and without regard for any improper consideration, be it politics, age, race or sexual orientation.

It's true that Mukasey's tenure hasn't seen the kind of blatant politicization in hiring that we saw under Alberto Gonzales -- and Mukasey's decision to appoint a special prosecutor to determine whether criminal wrongdoing occurred in regard to the US Attorneys firings may help us finally get to the bottom of that issue. But on crucial issues of the day like torture and warrantless wiretapping, he's been far from the model of independence that the Attorney General is supposed to represent.

One sidenote: The press release containing Mukasey's comments was dated: "TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2008" Two mistakes by DOJ in one attempt to render today's date! Really gives you confidence in our federal law enforcement system.

Harriet Miers

House Not Giving Up The Fight On Miers-Bolten Testimony

Zachary Roth | January 7, 2009, 5:39PM

In case you were worried, the coming of a new Congress won't stop House leaders from continuing their long-running effort to obtain documents and testimony about the US Attorney firings from White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers.

As part of the rules package voted on by members yesterday, the House voted to continue its lawsuit against the White House, which seeks to compel Miers and Bolten to testify and hand over the documents, reports the Las Vegas Sun. Citing executive privilege, the two have been defying subpoenas issued by the House Judiciary committee, creating a protracted legal struggle.

Those subpoenas expired with the start of the new Congress, so as part of the rules package, the House passed rules ensuring the subpoenas could be promptly reissued.

Let the legal maneuvering continue!

Alberto Gonzales

Leahy: You Guys Voted For Gonzo, So What's Wrong With Holder?

Zachary Roth | January 7, 2009, 2:16PM

The bad blood between Senate Judiciary chair Pat Leahy, and ranking Republican Arlen Specter, over Attorney General nominee Eric Holder, shows no signs of abating.

Yesterday, Specter pointedly questioned Holder's record of independence, even comparing Holder to Alberto Gonzales -- a low blow by any measure.

Leahy, who supports Holder's confirmation, seems to have taken exception. His office today released the following statement in his name -- which tries to turn the Gonzo precedent back on Specter:

We need the new Attorney General to be a person of experience and independence. Eric Holder's long record of public service has earned him strong support from law enforcement organizations, civil rights groups, victims' rights advocates, former Reagan and Bush administration officials, and others. Any effort to question his character is unfounded. Every Republican voted for Alberto Gonzales, and felt his character merited confirmation. Certainly Eric Holder greatly exceeds that test.

Oh snap.

For weeks, Leahy and Specter have been bickering over the nomination. Specter prevailed on his opposite number to delay the confirmation hearings, citing a need to look more closely at Holder's record, in particular his role in the pardon of Marc Rich

Arlen Specter

Specter: Holder Could Be Another Gonzo

Zachary Roth | January 6, 2009, 6:24PM

It doesn't get harsher than that.

In a floor speech today, Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary committee, suggested that Eric Holder, Barack Obama's nominee for Attorney General, might follow in the footsteps of ... Alberto Gonzales!

The Washington Independent reports that Specter cited several of the attacks that we've heard from GOPers since Holder's nomination was announced -- including the Al Gore "campaign finance violations" of 1996, the Elian Gonzalez case, and the last-minute pardon of Marc Rich.

Then Specter really hit below the belt, declaring:

After our recent experience with Attorney General Gonzales, it is imperative that the Attorney General undertake and effectuate that responsibility of independence. Mr. Gonzales left office accused of politicizing the Justice Department, failing to restrain Executive overreaching, and being less than forthcoming with Congress ... I am convinced that many of Attorney General Gonzales' missteps were caused by his eagerness to please the White House. Similarly, when Mr. Holder was serving as DAG to President Clinton, some of his actions raised concerns about his ability to maintain his independence from the president.

Specter concluded:

I am prepared to give Mr. Holder a full opportunity to explain his past actions and convince the Committee and the Senate that his record warrants confirmation.

As we noted last month, Specter has already tried to throw a hitch into the Holder nomination, ultimately prevailing on Judiciary chair Pat Leahy to postpone Holder's confirmation hearings, citing the need to scrutinize Holder's record -- particularly on the Rich pardon -- more closely.

But comparing Holder to Gonzales surely goes too far.

Barack Obama

Obama Announces Top DOJ Picks

Zachary Roth | January 5, 2009, 11:35AM

The process of rebuilding the Department of Justice after eight years of unprecedented politicization under President Bush continues apace.

President-elect Barack Obama today announced, in a press release, his nominees to fill four key posts under Eric Holder, his pick for Attorney General.

They are:

David Ogden for Deputy Attorney General;
Elena Kagan, Solicitor General;
Tom Perrelli, Associate Attorney General;
Dawn Johnsen, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel.

Ogden was an assistant Attorney General, and served as chief of staff to Attorney General Janet Reno during the Clinton administration.

Kagan is the Dean of Harvard Law School, and served as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy in the Clinton White House.

Perelli was, among other things, managing editor of the Harvard Law Review under Obama's editorship.

In the release, Obama made reference once again to the department's troubles under Bush, declaring:

I have the fullest confidence that they will ensure that the Department of Justice once again fulfills its highest purpose: to uphold the Constitution and protect the American people.

Full bios for all four after the jump...

Read more »