TPMMuckraker
Nora Dannehy

Rep Who Led Miers/Rove Questioning: Iglesias Case Was Most 'Pernicious Case Of Partisan Interference'

Justin Elliott | August 11, 2009, 3:30PM

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the House Judiciary Committee member who led questioning of Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, released a statement today skewering the Bush White House for considering "partisan and political considerations" in firing US Attorneys.

He concludes that "a weak and pliant leadership" of the Justice Department "largely refused to stand up to the pressure."

Schiff's office says the committee's findings will be forwarded, as expected, to prosecutor Nora Dannehy, who is investigating possible criminal wrongdoing in the firings.

Schiff's full statement:

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (0) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (6)
Topics: Adam Schiff, Harriet Miers, Justice Department, Karl Rove, Nora Dannehy, U.S. Attorneys

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.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (27) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (58)
Topics: DOJ Office Of The Inspector General, DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility, David Iglesias, Michael Mukasey, Nora Dannehy, Pete Domenici, U.S. Attorneys

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.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (24) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (14)
Topics: Alberto Gonzales, Eric Holder, Justice Department, Nora Dannehy, Torture

Alberto Gonzales

Gonzo's Lawyer Quits Civil Case. Another Sign That Prosecutor Is Circling?

Zachary Roth | December 5, 2008, 12:35PM

It's looking more and more like prosecutor Nora Dannehy's investigation into the US Attorney firings has Alberto Gonzales in its crosshairs.

Earlier this week we reported that Dannehy had contacted the ex-AG in connection with the probe.

Now, we've been tipped to legal filings showing that Gonzales' lawyer, George Terwilliger Jr. of White & Case, is no longer representing Gonzo in a separate case, a civil suit alleging that law students were denied DOJ jobs thanks to illegal politicization at the department under Gonzales.

The filing, dated November 25, reads:

Please enter the withdrawal of George J. Terwilliger III as counsel in this case for Defendant Alberto R. Gonzales, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.6(b).

Beneath that, Gonzales has signed his name, giving his consent to the withdrawal.

The previous day, in a separate filing, Gonzales had officially introduced a new team of attorneys as replacements, it would appear, for Terwilliger.

Please enter the appearance of Vincent H. Cohen, Jr., Peter Taylor, Lisa Fishberg and the law firm of Schertler & Onorato, LLP, on behalf of Defendant Alberto R. Gonzales.

What does this have to do with the Dannehy investigation?

It would appear that the most obvious reason for Terwilliger to withdraw from the civil suit is to be able to devote additional time to Dannehy's more serious investigation into criminal wrong-doing.

That's certainly the opinion of the veteran Washington lawyer bringing the civil suit in question. Dan Metcalfe, a former DOJ official and now the executive director of the Collaboration on Government Secrecy at American University Washington College of Law, who brought the suit on behalf of the law students, told TPMmuckraker*: "I think it's quite fair to say that the most plausible explanation for what happened is that [Terwilliger] learned he was going to be otherwise occupied on Gonzales' behalf."

That would jibe with the news earlier this week that Dannehy has issued subpoenas through a grand jury -- it would be common practice at this point for targets in the investigation to receive letters from the prosecutor informing them that they are under investigation. And of course it would be in sync with our report that Dannehy appears to have contacted Gonzales or his lawyer in connection with the probe.

A call to Terwilliger was directed instead to Bob Bork Jr., a spokesman for Gonzales, who told TPMmuckraker: "I have no comment about anything to do with Mr. Gonzales' representation." Asked whether he could comment more broadly on the investigation, Bork repeated: "I have no comment about anything to do with Mr. Gonzales' representation."

Late Update: There's additional evidence that Terwilliger is feeling jumpy about the twin cases, and is anxious to draw a distinction between the civil suit and the possible criminal investigation. Within hours of a story being posted by the legal publication AM Law Daily incorrectly stating that DOJ was paying Gonzales' lawyers for their work on the Dannehy investigation, Terwilliger had posted the following comment on the site:

Please correct your story as it is plainly in error to report that the Justice Department is paying Judge Gonzales' legal fees in connection with the Inspector General inquiries. Those fees are a private responsibility. DOJ is reportedly paying fees at governement [sic] rates to another law firm in connection with a civil law suit in which Judge Gonzales has been sued in his individual capacity in connection with events in which he was involved, if at all, in his offical [sic] capacity.

The site quickly posted a correction.

* This sentence has been corrected from an earlier version.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (24) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (33)
Topics: Alberto Gonzales, Justice Department, Nora Dannehy, U.S. Attorneys

Alberto Gonzales

DOJ Won't Say Whether Prosecutor Has Submitted US Attorneys Report

Zachary Roth | December 4, 2008, 3:32PM

Is the Department of Justice going back on its word about a report on its investigation into whether crimes were committed in the U.S. Attorney firings scandal?

When prosecutor Nora Dannehy was appointed to run the probe, in the wake of another investigation by the department's Inspector General, it was reported that Dannehy was expected to provide Attorney General Michael Mukasey with a status report on her findings within around 60 days.

That timeline was confirmed by DOJ Inspector General Glenn Fine in testimony before Congress at the time:

REP. NADLER: Mr. Fine, it's been reported that Ms. Dannehy was appointed to special counsel, will make a preliminary report to the attorney general within the next two months. Do you know when this report will be made public?

MR. FINE: I think what it is is the status of the investigation at that point to the deputy attorney general or the attorney general to see where she is in the process.

...

I don't think it's sort of a formal report; I think it's more of a status report.

And it was reiterated a few weeks later in a letter from Mukasey to House Judiciary Chair John Conyers. Mukasey wrote:

As the Inspector General testified, Ms. Dannehy is expected to report on the status of the investigation to the Attorney General approximately 60 days after her appointment.

Now that 60-day deadline has come and gone. And DOJ won't confirm that any such report has been provided, instead referring us to a spokesman for Dannehy who wouldn't comment on the issue.

In other words, at first DOJ had been clear that it wanted a report submitted within 60 days. But now it won't even confirm that such a report has been submitted, or give any further information.

So is the department now going back on its requirement that Dannehy submit a report within 60 days? Is it exerting pressure to reduce the likelihood that details about Dannehy's progress -- like the fact that she's contacted Gonzales -- will slip out? What's going on?

A staffer for the House judiciary committee told TPMmuckraker that they haven't been able to get anythign out of DOJ either on whether Dannehy has submitted a report. A call to the Senate judiciary committee was not immediately returned.

We'll keep you posted as we learn more...

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (8) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (10)
Topics: Alberto Gonzales, DOJ Office Of The Inspector General, Glenn Fine, Justice Department, Michael Mukasey, Nora Dannehy, U.S. Attorneys

Alberto Gonzales

Gonzo Contacted By Prosecutor On US Attorneys Firings

Zachary Roth | December 3, 2008, 3:46PM

This morning, as we noted, the Washington Post reported that the prosecutor Nora Dannehy has met with defense lawyers and issued subpoenas, through a grand jury, in her investigation into criminal wrongdoing in connection with the US Attorney firings.

And it looks like Alberto Gonzales, the former Attorney General on whose watch the firings occurred, is among the people she's contacted.

In an interview with TPMmuckraker, Bob Bork Jr., who serves as a spokesman for the ex-AG, initially said that although Gonzales' lawyer, George Terwilliger III, had reached out to Dannehy at the start of her investigation, he didn't believe that Dannehy had formally contacted Gonzales or Terwilliger in connection with the probe.

But Bork Jr. called back an hour later to say that he had been mistaken about that. "We won't be able to talk about any interactions with DOJ," he now said.

In other words, it would appear, Dannehy has contacted Gonzo and/or his lawyer.

Since DOJ released a report in July into politicized hiring at the department, there has been intense speculation that Gonzales could face perjury charges in connection to his 2007 testimony to Congress.

Tom Carson, a spokesman for Dannehy declined to comment on the progress of the investigation.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (19) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (19)
Topics: Alberto Gonzales, Justice Department, Nora Dannehy, U.S. Attorneys

Alberto Gonzales

Prosecutor On US Attorneys Case Seems To Be Going All Out

Zachary Roth | December 3, 2008, 10:05AM

A report in the Washington Post suggests that Nora Dannehy, the prosecutor assigned by Attorney General Michael Mukasey to look into the U.S. attorney firings, is taking an aggressive approach to the job.

The Post says Dannehy "has been meeting with defense lawyers, dispatching subpoenas and seeking information about the events, according to legal sources familiar with the case."

It adds: "A grand jury in the District has issued subpoenas, the sources said."

And there's another interesting nugget:

D. Kyle Sampson, who served as the chief of staff to Gonzales until his March 2007 resignation, recently took a leave from his job as a partner at the law firm Hunton & Williams while the investigation proceeds. A spokeswoman for the law firm said he is on leave "pending admission to the D.C. bar."

DOJ's Inspector General report, released in late September, found that Sampson's testimony was "not credible" and "unpersuasive."

Dannehy was appointed September 29 to determine whether crimes had been committed in the affair. She was given 60 days to submit a preliminary report on her findings. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from TPMmuckraker about the report's status.