
Ken Melson, the embattled acting head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), told Congressional investigators that he became "sick to his stomach" after learning details of the troubled anti-gun-trafficking program called Fast and Furious.
Melson on Tuesday testified for the first time before investigators for the House Oversight and Government Reform and Senate Judiciary Committees, which have been pummeling the administration with questions about controversial tactics to stop the flow of weapons from the U.S. to Mexican drug cartels. Melson, who appeared in a private meeting before the panel with his own personal counsel rather than Justice Department attorneys, said DOJ officials had prevented him from cooperating with Congress' investigations thus far.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) railed against President Barack Obama's nominees to the federal bench on Tuesday afternoon, complaining that Obama was only nominating individuals with "ACLU DNA" and rattling off a list of potential judges who are now or have ever been a member of the American Civil Liberties Union.
"I'm sure that less than one percent of the lawyers in America are members of the ACLU," Sessions said. "It seems if you have the ACLU DNA, you get a pretty good leg up to being nominated by this president."
The ACLU -- which has over 500,000 members and supporters -- did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)President Barack Obama's nominee to take over the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) faces a pretty big hurdle to securing his confirmation by the Senate: opposition from the National Riffle Association.
It didn't take long for the NRA to come out against Andrew Traver once his nomination was announced by the White House last Monday night. Less than two business days later, the NRA was out with a release not only opposing Traver's nomination, but calling for Obama to withdraw the nomination altogether. ATF, the agency charged with enforcing the nation's gun laws, has been without a permanent director since 2006.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Stacia A. Hylton, the Obama administration's nominee to head the U.S. Marshals -- who came under fire from human rights groups and criminal justice organizations for her ties to the private prison industry -- told the Senate Judiciary Committee that she followed all ethics requirements before beginning her consulting work.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has declined to hold another hearing on the New Black Panthers case, which had been requested by the committee's Republicans.
From Leahy's letter, via Greg Sargent:
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee want a hearing to investigate how the Department of Justice handled allegations of voter intimidation made against the New Black Panther Party.
The minority, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham, wants to look into allegations of racial bias within the DOJ. The charges come most vocally from J. Christian Adams, a former DOJ lawyer who says the Obama administration purposely drops cases against black defendants, including an NBPP member who stood outside a Philly polling station with a nightstick in 2008.
As the Senate gets set to take up Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court, the slow pace of confirmation for lower-court nominations is creating vacancies that are gumming up the system and could even pose a long-term threat to President Obama's agenda. In response, some who follow the process are calling on Democrats to get tougher on GOP obstructionism. "We need a Nancy Pelosi in the Senate," said one progressive activist.
After yesterday's confirmations of Jon DeGuilo and Timothy Black to district court judge-ships, the Senate has now confirmed 26 of President Obama's nominees -- compared to 52 at this point in President Bush's tenure. Forty-two nominations are pending -- 20 in committee, and 22 on the Senate floor. Meanwhile, there are currently 102 court vacancies. That's an unprecedented backlog, observers of the process agree.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)Is Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) playing both sides on the "controversy" over Justice Department lawyers who represented Guantanamo detainees?
Yesterday, the South Carolina senator joined a growing chorus of conservatives in slamming a recent ad by Liz Cheney's advocacy group that questioned the loyalties of seven DOJ attorneys who had previously represented Gitmo detainees. The ad, by Keep America Safe, referred to the lawyers as "the Al Qaeda Seven," and asked "Whose values do they represent?"
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)An attack on Justice Department officials who previously represented detainees at Guantanamo was spawned by Sen. Chuck Grassley at a hearing last November, ricocheted around the right-wing media, and culminated today in a video release by Liz Cheney's group that all but accuses the lawyers of being terrorists.
The campaign-style ad from Cheney's Keep America Safe dubs the lawyers "the Al Qaeda Seven" and asks, "Whose values do they share?" while flashing a picture of Osama bin Laden. (Watch it below.)
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (8)The two top Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee went after the DOJ's ethics office today, blasting the torture memo report produced by the Office of Professional Responsibility.
"The first report was filled with gaping holes, shoddy legal analysis .. and a clear desire to punish Mr. Yoo and Mr. Bybee even if the facts didn't support it," said Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) in his opening statement.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy just kicked off a hearing on the Justice Department torture memo report, and he immediately raised the question of John Yoo's missing emails.
"My first question will be, where are Mr. Yoo's emails?" Leahy said, promising to pose the question to Acting Deputy Attorney General Gary Grindler.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)More than a month after Republicans started attacking President Obama for prosecuting the attempted Christmas bombing suspect in federal court, two top Senate Dems have finally come out to back Obama in strong terms.
Patrick Leahy and Diane Feinstein, chairs of the Judiciary and Intelligence committees, respectively, write in a letter to the president today that federal criminal courts -- not military commissions -- should be used to prosecute terrorists.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)As three separate Senate committees today hold hearings on the failed Christmas attack over Detroit, watch for Republicans to take the opportunity to ramp up their criticism of the Obama Administration.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)So, what came out of today's hearings on torture?
Here's some fun/horrifying video form the torture hearings this morning of Lindsey Graham browbeating a witness, David Luban of Georgetown Law, who disagrees with him. Graham repeatedly asks questions, then prevents Luban from finishing his answer when the witness starts to say something that Graham objects to.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (11)It looks like Lindsey Graham just cited John Kiriakou's interview with ABC News, in which the former CIA interrogator claimed that the use of enhanced interrogation techniques broke Abu Zubaydah within minutes.
Did Graham miss the fact that ABC News's report has been authoritatively debunked -- and that ABC News has acknowledged as much?
Looks like he did -- or doesn't care.
Philip Zelikow is now being asked about the decision by President Obama to close Guantanamo.
He told the committee:
Guantanamo has become in world public opinion a toxic problem for the United States America. And so we needed to address that in our foreign policy.
Zelikow also said -- contra the fear-mongering by GOPers lately -- we routinely hold in US mainland prisons terror suspects like Ramzi Yousef who are believed to be far more dangerous than many of the detainees in Gitmo.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)Ali Soufan is now making the point that torture advocates cite the interrogations of KSM and Jose Padilla as two cases in which torture produced results. But waterboarding wasn't approved until August 1, 2002 -- after the interrogations of those two suspects occurred.
In other words, he seems to be arguing that such techniques weren't used, at least with legal sign-off, to produce that information.
This will undoubtedly need follow up.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (6)This is fascinating...
Sheldon Whitehouse is leading Ali Soufan through questioning. What Soufan is saying is that when he used lawful interrogation techniques agaist Zubaydah, he got actionable intelligence within an hour, including the identification of Khalid Sheik Mohamed as the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.
However, when a contractor came in and began using harsher techniques, Zubaydah clammed up. It became clear that Zubaydah had received training on how to resist torture.
Ali Soufan, who has participated in interrogations of high-level terror suspects including Abu Zubaydah, is giving a detailed explanation of superior intelligence methods, within the Army field manual, that don't involve torture.
Soufan said that when he used such methods on Zubaydah, they produced actionable intelligence in less than an hour.
As for torture, said Soufan: "This amateurish technique is harmful to our long-term interests. It plays into the enemies playbook."
Soufan made clear: "My interest is not to advocate the prosecution of anyone." Rather, he wants to see us learn from our mistakes.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (15)Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, chairing the torture hearings, quotes French revolutionary era diplomat Talleyrand:
The greatest danger in times of crisis comes from the zeal of those who are inexperienced.
Now the next witness, former FBI agent Ali Soufan, is speaking. Soufan has asked that his face not be shown, so most cameras have been removed from the room. The CSPAN camera is showing the other witnesses.
Philip Zelikow just offered a bit of news about the memo he wrote offering an alternative view on the legality of torture, which he said the White House tried to have destroyed.
Zelikow told the Senate committee that the memo, which had not previously been found, "has been located in State Department files and is being reviewed for declassification."
He said that at the time, he thought the effort to have the memo destroyed -- which he described as "informal" -- was "improper" and ignored it.
And it sounds like we may get a look at it soon.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)As we prepare for a Senate hearing on the Bush torture program, it's worth taking a look at an interview that one of the key witnesses, Philip Zelikow, gave to Foreign Policy's Laura Rozen yesterday, which provided an advanced look at what he's likely to say.
Zelikow, a top State Department lawyer under Condoleezza Rice, recently revealed that the White House tried to destroy all copies of a memo he wrote that offered an alternative view on the legality of torture. He later said he suspected at the time that Dick Cheney had led that effort.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (6)As the calls for his impeachment grow louder, Jay Bybee -- the Bush OLC lawyer who wrote one of the torture memos, and who is now a federal judge -- has been given the chance to share his side of the story.
The unlikely invitation comes from Pat Leahy, the chair of the Senate Judiciary committee. In a letter sent to Bybee today, Leahy invites him to testify before the committee about his role in writing the memos.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (9)Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) went on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show last night, to talk about the fallout from the release last week of the Bush administration's torture memos. And his appearance added to the growing sense that pressure is mounting to hold the memos' authors accountable.
Whitehouse, who sits on the Senate Judiciary committee, did temporarily pour a little bit of cold water on the spate of calls to impeach Jay Bybee, the author of one of the memos, who is now a federal judge. He said that it's "certainly possible" that Bybee should be impeached, but that first, we should wait for the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility to release its long-held report into the authorship of the memos.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (22)GOP senators Arlen Specter and John Cornyn are leaving no doubt where they stand on Senate Judiciary chair Pat Leahy's proposal to create a Truth Commission to look into the Bush administration's war on terror policies.
They oppose it.
In a press release the pair sent out, Specter said:
When this idea of the so-called 'truth commission' first surfaced I said it was unnecessary because you had a change of administration, you could walk in the front door, ask for directions to the relevant filing cabinet, go in and open the drawer and find out anything you wanted to know. Well that's been done. And it's being done to a greater extent. You had some rather startling disclosures with the publicity in recent days about the unusual, to put it mildly, legal opinions which were issued to justify executive action.
Cornyn added:
I oppose the creation of a so-called 'truth commission' because it is a redundant and politically divisive exercise that would distract the Executive, Congress, and the American people at a time when we should be focused on reinvigorating our economy and winning the war on terror. This roving, unaccountable inquisition into each and every grievance with a Bush Administration policy is a backward-looking proposition that is directly at odds with President Obama's stated goals of unity and moving forward. Now is not the time for government to waste more of taxpayers' money by outsourcing a core Congressional responsibility.
It appears these senators can't handle the truth.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)The Senate Judiciary committee is currently holding hearings on that proposal from committee chair Pat Leahy to set up a Truth Commission to look into the Bush administration's war on terror.
We'll have more to say on this whole subject soon, but for now it's worth noting that, as you'd expect, Bush allies are fighting hard to stymie Leahy's idea.
Just now, the committee heard from David Rivkin, a lawyer who served in the Justice Department and the White House under Presidents Reagan and George H. W. Bush.
Explaining why he opposed Leahy's proposal, Rivkin declared:
Yes, mistakes were made. Yes, some bad things happened. But compared with the historical baseline of past wars, the conduct of the United States in the past eight years ... has been exemplary.
We're sure that victims of torture under the Bush administration would appreciate Rivkin's willingness to supply that historical context.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) certainly didn't. He told Rivkin:
I would suggest, Mr. Rivkin, that until you know, and we all know, what was done under the Bush administration, you not be so quick to throw other generations of Americans under the bus, and assume that they did worse.
Late Update: Here's the video:
...as Attorney General by a vote of 75-21.
Said Pat Leahy, the chair of the Senate Judicary committe:
[O]f the last four Attorneys General, Eric Holder has the largest 'aye' vote of any of them. I think it is a good sign for the country. It is a good sign for the Department of Justice.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (8)
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...
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)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.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)
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:
"I want to assure you and the American people that I will be an independent Attorney General. I will be the people's lawyer," Eric Holder told the Senate judiciary committee moments ago, in response to a question form Sen. Herb Kohl.
Holder's answer suggests the extent to which the shadow of Alberto Gonzales hangs over the curent nominee's confirmation, which began this morning. Much of Senate Judiciary chair Pat Leahy's opening statement was an argument that Holder is the man to fix the problems of politicization at DOJ under Gonzales that we've chronicled at TPMmuckraker over the last two years.
Said Leahy, after noting the department's report, released Tuesday, into politicized hiring under Gonzales:
Americans must be able to trust their Justice Department. That trust must not be squandered or taken for granted. We need leaders who are prepared to take the laboring oars of a Justice Department whose dedicated law enforcement professionals have been misused and demoralized. Eric Holder is such a leader.
Just as revealingly, Republicans have centered their opposition to Holder on the claim, without much evidence, that, in fact, he's likely to be a second Gonzo. Earlier this month in a speech on the Senate floor, ranking GOPer Arlen Specter laid out the argument:
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.
As their main exhibits in this case, Specter and other GOPers have cited Holder's 2001 pardon, as a top DOJ official in the Clinton administration, of the fugitive financier Marc Rich, which it appeared was supported by the president. GOPers have also condemned Holder's support for clemency for members of the FALN, a Puerto Rican nationalist group, at a time when Hillary Clinton was seeking a Senate seat in New York, which has a large Puerto Rican population.
Already this morning, Specter has grilled Holder on these issues, declaring, in reference to Rich: "The indicators are that you were very heavily involved and yet you testified that you were only casually involved. So there's a question of candor there."
Holder responded:
I made mistakes ... in the Rich matter. I've accepted the responsibility of making those mistakes...I should have made sure that all the prosecutors in that case were informed of what was going on. I made assumptions that turned out not to be true ... I've learned from that experience. I think that, as perverse as this might sound, I will be a better Attorney General should I be confirmed, having had the Marc Rich experience.
It's great that Holder has learned from his mistakes. But, Specter's grandstanding notwithstanding, the entire attack is pretty bogus to begin with.
There's just not much of a comparison between the level of politicization that DOJ saw under Gonzales -- when US Attorneys were removed for not bringing cases that reflected the White House's political priorities, and officials actively sought to avoid hiring liberals -- and Holder's sins during the last administration. And that excludes the numerous examples, cited by Leahy and other Holder supporters in recent weeks, of Holder acting in ways counter to the president's interest while at DOJ.
But leaving aside the minor political theater over Holder, the prominence of Gonzales' record in these hearings, as a negative marker against which to measure Holder, is perhaps the strongest testament to the unprecedented damage that the former Attorney General, and the president, did to the department.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)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."PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (16)...
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.
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.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (8)
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.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (18)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.
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 ColumbiaPanel 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.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Election-law expert Rick Hasen picks out an interesting passage from the minority section of the Senate Judiciary Committee's just-released report into the US Attorneys firings.
Some members of the committee's Republican minority -- including senior senators like McCain pal Lindsey Graham, new NRSC chair John Cornyn, and ex-presidential candidate Sam Brownback -- strenuously disagreed with the findings of the Majority (and with an internal report produced by DOJ's Office of the Inspector General) that the White House helped engineer the firings, and that several of the dismissals were made for inappropriate political reasons.
Instead, they used the report as a chance to bang the drum on "voter fraud" one more time. But they continue to willfully confuse voter registration fraud with voter fraud -- even though numerous experts have now pointed out that there's no evidence that fraudulent voter registration forms lead to fraudulent votes being cast.
The dissenting Republicans wrote:
Perhaps the most Orwellian aspect of the Majority report is its repeated insistence that there is no vote fraud in this country that is ever worth investigating. At one point, the Majority even places scare quotes around the term, lest anyone receive the impression that the Majority believes that voter fraud could ever be a real problem. Yet during the federal elections just concluded, the American public saw numerous examples of serious attempts to commit voter fraud in this country.Most of these incidents involved the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a group that actively promotes voter registration in many cities across the nation. ACORN tends to target areas where it believes that it can register Democratic voters, such as parks, public-assistance agencies, and liquor stores, ACORN's history is littered with claims and convictions of fraud. and generally hires part-time workers who are paid for each registered name to canvas these areas. In this election cycle, many different groups, from journalists to the GOP, strongly criticized the integrity of the organization's registration methods. As early as September, state officials reported fraudulent voter registrations submitted by ACORN, and as of October 6th, the New York Times reported that about 400,000 ACORN filings had been rejected by authorities as duplicates, incomplete, or fraudulent. After comparing their voter registration rolls, Georgia, Florida, and Ohio found 112,000 duplicate voters registered in two states, and authorities have rejected ACORN applications attempting to register such "voters" as Mickey Mouse and the Dallas Cowboys' offensive line.
Notice that the Republicans stop short of saying voter fraud was actually committed. They do say flatly, however, that faulty registration forms submitted by ACORN amount to "serious attempts" to commit voter fraud.
But they don't offer a single piece of evidence to support even this reduced charge.
Not one citation given -- most of which are to columns by conservative opinion columnist John Fund, or to posts on the conservative blog Powerline -- leads to an example that contains any evidence whatsoever of an effort to actually commit voter fraud.
It's one thing for Fund or Sean Hannity to try to muddy up these distinctions in an effort to confuse people into believing that voter fraud actually exists in significant numbers. But it's pretty shocking when Senate Republicans do so.
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.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (16)
Democrats from the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees last week sent a letter to the White House demanding that it preserve all records produced by the Bush administration. The letter expressed particular concern that the office of Vice President Cheney would not comply with the law.
The letter, sent by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Sen. John D. Rockefeller of West Virginia and Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, asks White House counsel Fred Fielding to detail steps being taken to preserve White House documents and hand them over to the National Archives and Records Administration.
And it asks whether Fielding has investigated a Washington Post report that the White House has kept some presidential orders off it records, in a safe in the office of the vice president's lawyer.
Cheney's office is separately involved in a lawsuit brought by the watchdog group CREW, which is seeking to ensure that all vice presidential records are made available to the public.
The Democrats' letter cites that litigation, noting, "the declarations filed in that case by the Office of the Vice President raise serious concerns about its interpretations of the (Presidential Records Act)."
The law requires all presidential and vice presidential records to be transferred to the National Archives as soon as the president leaves office.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (21)
SJC Subpoenas Mukasey for Testimony and OLC DocsAfter the Washington Post beat the Senate Judiciary Committee to memos from the White House to the CIA endorsing interrogation practices, Chairman Patrick Leahy hasn't been pulling punches.
Today, Leahy issued a subpoena to Attorney Gen. Michael Mukasey demanding that he provide testimony and related documents to the committee about "legal analysis and advice from the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) related to the Bush administration's terrorism policies, including detention and interrogation policies and practices." The deadline for the testimony and documents is November 18. The committee voted on issuing the subpoena in a September 25 business meeting.
"This administration's stonewalling leaves this Committee without basic facts that are essential to carrying out its oversight responsibilities," Leahy said in his letter to Mukasey.
"There is no legitimate argument for withholding the requested materials from this Committee. The Executive Branch should not obstruct Congress from conducting its constitutional oversight and lawmaking duties by making sweeping assertions of secrecy and privilege."
Leahy and the Bush administration have been embroiled in an ongoing tussle over access to administration documents. As Leahy explains in today's letter, in August he wrote to White House counsel Fred Fielding requesting the documents, and was rebuffed. Fielding referred Leahy to DOJ, which continued to stonewall. As a result, the committee voted to authorize the subpoena, which was issued to Mukasey today.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)
