Obstruction of Justice

By: Teddy
Published On: 3/22/2007 1:35:50 PM

The gauntlet has been thrown down in the growing controversy over the firing of eight U.S. prosecutors: President Bush has announced he will not allow White House functionaries to testify before Congressional oversight Committees under oath, but only in private and off the record (no recorded testimony), and that's his final offer, take it or leave it, and if the Democrats refuse they are only playing politics, and there will be no testimony allowed.  So sayeth The Decider.

The past week has seen a blizzard of the usual attacks from the Republican noise machine, chief of which is naturally "Clinton did it," with Karl Rove saying that the previous Administration (i.e., Clinton) replaced 123 federal prosecutors.
As it happened, both Bush I and Clinton replaced all 93 prosecutors at the beginnings of their presidencies as part of the traditional change of power, not in the middle of their administrations like this.  Sidney Blumental in Salon.com on 22 March (http://www.salon.com...) said "A report issued on Feb. 22 from the Congressional Research Service revealed that between 1981 and 2006, only five of the 486 U.S. attorneys failed to finish their four-year terms, and none were fired for political reasons." White House protestations that it is the Democrats who are politicizing the firings might be considered prima facie evidence that politicization was the actual intent of the Republican President since we have learned over time it is the habit of Republicans to accuse the opposition of what they themselves are doing, as a smoke screen or cover.

The ostentatiously stern warning from Bush refusing to allow public testimony under oath rings false: What is Bush really trying to hide?  Listening to Dubya's tone of voice we hear a petulant adolescent who is engaged in a snow job (really, "Snow" job, listen to Press Secretary Tony Snow's pious mouthings about the whole affair, exactly the opposite of what he said during the Clinton impeachment investigations). 

Caught in the act, Bush is blustering, intent on creating a constitutional crisis which will throw the question of subpoenas from Congress to the Executive Branch into the courts, where Bush feels comfortable with conservative Republican judges who favor unitary executive power- they stopped the Florida re-count and declared him President, didn't they?- thus delaying, possibly for years, a judicial resolution of the question.  By refusing to declassify information in the Plame case Bush stopped Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald in his tracks, and limited the damage to Scooter Libby.  What else could we now expect?

As for politicization, we have this item taken from an internal e-mail recently released, dated Jan. 6, 2005, which quoted Rove as asking "how we planned to proceed regarding the U.S. attorneys." Three days later there was another e-mail, "Re: Question from Karl Rove, as an operational matter we would like to replace 15-20 percent of the current U.S. attorneys -- the underperforming ones ...The vast majority of U.S. attorneys, 80-85 percent I would guess, are doing a great job, are loyal Bushies." 

Some of the fired prosecutors, like John McKay of Washington and David Iglesias of New Mexico (himself a Republican) have also stated publicly that they were hassled by national Republicans, Congresspersons and Senators about either speeding up cases against Democrats, instituting "voter fraud" indictments when evidence was lacking, creating illegal immigration investigations more less out of whole cloth, or halting investigations and cases against Republicans prior to the November elections.

U. S. Attorney Carol Lam in California who successfully prosecuted Congressman Randy Cunningham was fired just as she was following up on the Randy Trail, which was leading to prominent Republicans like Brent Wilkes and Dusty Foggo (who is coincidentally chief of, ahem, contracting at the CIA, heh, heh).

Of what sort of "under performance" are these prosecutors guilty? Apparently of doing their jobs in an unpolitical and effective manner, i.e., not being what Blumenthal calls "the Republican Office of the Holy Inquisition."  They did not prosecute enough Democrats and actually had the temerity to investigate a few Republicans!

Also: Where are the strangely missing e-mails?  That is, there is a huge 16-day gap between those e-mails (quoted above), at the beginning of the purge which displayed Rove's key position at the heart of the firings, and the later ones after the purge was already well underway.  "The Gap" showed up in the same brusque dump from the Justice Department, and would probably show who authorized the final hit list, the method of the actual purge, the "explanations" for the firings. In other words, what did Karl Rove know, when did he know it- and on whose orders did the firings proceed?  Were the relevant e-mails ah, destroyed?  Like Nixon's 18 minutes of erased tape, no doubt.

Then there are Republican officials, like Senator Domenici and Representative Heather Wilson, both of New Mexico, who meddled in U.S. Attorney Iglesias's cases, and who may well face obstruction of justice charges.  These two, at least, have already hired attorneys in anticipation of exactly that.  There are many, many more Republican functionaries apparently guilty of the same charge. The more we learn the more virulent the corruption at every level.

It seems self-evident that Bush is protecting not only Republican big wigs from obstruction of justice charges, but more importantly his own chain of command: Gonzales did not invent the purge, he was following orders, and by protecting Rove from testifying under oath, it would seem Mr. Bush is protecting himself as either the originator of the purge, or the one who gave the final orders to Rove to Gonzales to Sampson (Gonzales' Chief of Staff, who has already resigned as the first fall guy). 

This is what happens when you have a gang posing as a political party determined to turn their elected position into a permanent, one-party state so they can continue to plunder the treasury until the country is sucked dry. There are those who seem already to have decided they have siphoned off the most they can, and are getting out while the getting is good: Halliburton is on its way to Dubai.  Who will be the next Republican fat cat to take his winnings and slink off? 


Comments



It isn't Gonzales (Teddy - 3/22/2007 2:11:26 PM)
and we all know that, although there is no doubt, after Alberto's performance on Abu Ghraib and torture, that he in good lap-dog style rationalized everything about the purge in a comforting fashion for his boss.  This has Rove's finger prints all over it. Listen to the resonances in Bush's voice as he attacks the Democrats (and Congress) and arrogantly refuses any cooperation if the Congress does not take his non-negotiable offer. The bad boy knows he is in trouble and is trying to bully his way out.  The story of his miserable life. When, oh lord, do we reach the point of impeachment?  I was against such a case in the beginning, but it becomes more reasonable every day.


Two words against Impeachment: President Cheney (DanG - 3/22/2007 2:24:51 PM)


cheney for ten years! (pvogel - 3/22/2007 3:08:29 PM)
Lets just endure the next 20 monthes.



Oversight: Link to Primer (FMArouet - 3/22/2007 3:53:33 PM)
And Tony Snow today essentially denied the existence of congressional ovrsight. Somebody please hold his feet to the fire.

Here is a link to a good primer on congressional oversight and related Supreme Court decisions upholding it:

http://www.rules.hou...

Isn't there a single journalist in the White House Press Corps who has done some research on these issues? White House correspondents who care about doing their job are going to be needing this kind of historical context every day from now on.



White House Press Briefings...lack of reporter follow up (Dianne - 3/24/2007 8:30:59 AM)
I agree with your comment completely, especially about the WH Press Corps.  It's pretty frustrating to 1) watch Tony Snow "lecture" the press corps during these briefings/Q & A's and 2) not have the reporters follow up with "why" questions (i.e., "for what cause, purpose or reason?"; "with what intention, justification, or motive?"). 

Snow will say something outrageous and more often than not there is no follow up "why" question (which would probably blow a hole the size of a football field on his pontifications and obfuscations).  A simple "why", nothing else, would reveal the coverups, the clouding, and the deceiving. 



I'm Hoping There Is A General Wave of Disgust (PM - 3/22/2007 4:59:09 PM)
that heavily damages the GOP, 2008 and beyond.

And I would like to see honest, thorough, not politically motivated investigations after the 2008 election which might, if the evidence was substantial, support criminal charges against Bush and Cheney

That $140,000 payment to MZM, and then the same amount for the boat, looks awfully suspicious.

Here's a thought.  Not only is the Internet catching heretofore unreported corruption, but so is the e-mail system.



Betrayal by e-mail (Teddy - 3/22/2007 5:52:47 PM)
You're right, e-mails are turning out to be most enlightening... so what happened to the 16-days' worth that somehow did not make it into the Justice Department dump? Some one once told me if anything ever was on the Internet it was still lurking out there somewhere, so is that true and can we look forward to reading what was written during those 16 days?


I would gladly trade (JPTERP - 3/23/2007 1:39:18 AM)
long-term damage to the GOP for a rectification of a truly gross abuse of executive power.

Rove and Gonzales should both be out of jobs.  Gonzales for gross incompetence.  Rove for engaging in behavior that is criminal and amoral in principle--truly Nixonian.

I see this as more of an abuse of power--and the corrosive effect of power under one party rule.  I think there is actually a real danger long-term if the GOP is so thoroughly damaged that it cannot function as a legitimate opposition party, because of this. 

The GOP is clearly confronted with a clear choice.  Will it aid and abet criminal behavior by the White House, or will it get some separation from one of the most inept and corrupt administrations that our nation has ever seen. 

I don't see an easy way out of this impasse.



Long term damage to the GOP (Teddy - 3/23/2007 3:45:22 PM)
is what you say, but it would more realistically called be considered to be long-term damage to the American political system, which is actually based on the two-party system (although political parties are no where mentioned in the Constitution).

We have had periods when strong currents of change subsumed the two-party system, such as during the run-up to the Civil War, when during the election immediately preceding the outbreak of hostilities several parties fielded serious presidential candidates.  Then there was the period after that War, when Republicans ruled as victors in that War and castigated Democrats as the Party of "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion." That, too, was a period of big business run amok and of vicious corruption among Republicans, even sporting its own contested and questionable presidential election.

Let's see if a rump Republican Conservative Party surfaces on the right for the next election. Or, worse, a rump Progressive Party on the left... or both. 



Impeach Gonzales (Susan P. - 3/22/2007 6:31:49 PM)
There are more than enough grounds.


What seems to be lost in the debate (RuthF - 3/22/2007 7:43:04 PM)
about these firings is that the president et al got rid of these attorneys and then put news ones in their place under an egregious last minute entry into the Patriot Act that allowed these attorneys to avoid confirmation by the Senate--I think that's one reason that the Rpublican members of Congress are also up in arms about this situation--and, of course, add to that the fact that Gonzales lied to Congress when he last testified before them.

This whole line of (faulty) reasoning about not supoenning (can't spell it but you know what I mean Rove et al b/c they couldn't give candid counsel to the president if they knew that could be hauled in to testify before Congress at any time is pure slippery slope.

Evidence from the emails has surfaced that support the claims that the dismissals were purely political--and so this investigation is not the partisan witch hunt that Bush would have Americans believe. 

Of course these Bushies should testify under oath about these dismissals--otherwise what we have is hear say and a waste of everyone's time.

And in the meantime 8 people have been fired under a cloud of lies and innuendo that is harming their professional and personal reputations.

 



Thanks Teddy (Rebecca - 3/22/2007 9:38:22 PM)
Great post Teddy. Personally I think we have just scratched the surface on the corruption. I'd like to make some predictions. Many of my speculations has manifested so far. This is not just looking into a crytal ball, but a compilations of deductions from research and talking to people with connections over about 5 years. You're free to call me a kook for some of these if you like. I don't mind. These are speculations based on both research and gut feelings.

1. It will be shown that Rove and other prominent Republicans are behind much vote fraud in this country and two or three other countries as well (maybe more).

2. It will be revealed that many more government posts which are traditionally life long were filled with Bushies instead, having had the life-longs fired. Actually, this is already true. No need to speculate.

3. It will be shown that, although Rove was the hatchet man, Bush had a habit of drinking and ranting about his enemies at the White House saying things like "f-k 'em over" about those who disagreed with his policies (this has been reported by insiders). What specifically was meant we will learn, but no doubt Joseph Wilson can elaborate.

4. George Bush is a practiced socipathic liar and uses religious language to cloak and justify much of his lying.

5.Bush's ego is so big that he really believes people like Pat Robertson who tell him he is God's messenger.

6. Bush has had lapses into homosexual behavior while in the White House. (Take your hand off that man's leg!)

7. Bush knows whether or Ann Coulter is really a man. (Just for laughs)

8. Bush and Cheney have drained the Treasury through their bogus military boon-doogle contracts stuffing away a few trillion for a rainy day. Much of the money has been funneled to their own private mercenaries.

9. The US employed mercenaries are instigating much of the internicene hostilities in Iraq on the theory that its cheaper if they kill each other than if we do it. This is a strategy similar to aiding both sides in the Iraq-Iran war.

10. Rumsfeld is still running the Pentagon from a moldy room in the basement. They call him the Phantom of the Pentagon.



Vote fraud (Teddy - 3/22/2007 10:05:03 PM)
in other countries: according to Greg Palast this exact thing did occur in the recent Mexican election, when Rove sent some of his minions to help Calderon. There is also some question about an earlier election in Russia, when American operatives introduced some American-style electioneering, and vote manipulation. Strikes me as entirely possible, given Dubya's penchant for meddling.  Do you have some other countries in mind?

Conspiracy theories usually give me a headache, and I used automatically to reject them (along with UFO abductions) but after 7 years of these neo-Republicans I am changing my mind, and suspect that at least some of them are only too true, and many others are unfortunately all too likely. Robert Parry at consortium.com has quite a rap sheet on the Bush Family as a whole, going back to Iran hostage crisis, oil deals, Iran Contra and beyond.



Wonder what they'll eventually discover about Ohio and Florida (PM - 3/22/2007 10:14:37 PM)
And I've read a few of the books about the Bush family.  I am skeptical about conspiracies but I think the Bush family (after Prescott Bush) is corrupt from A to Z.


Several lawsuits are in the works in Ohio (Rebecca - 3/23/2007 10:23:32 AM)
Ken Blackwell and other Ohio Republicans are facing multiple lawsuits relating to vote fraud. Ballots have been found with tape over the Kerry/Edwards punch and having the Bush/Cheney hole punched out.Of course much more happened.

One of the nominees for US attorney was involved in blocking black and hispanic servicemen from the voting roles based on the fact that they were not living at their residence. They were deployed so they weren't at home.



Might want to check this out... (Detcord - 3/25/2007 9:26:07 AM)
...since I'm having a real hard time believing it.  Source?


Interesting list, Rebecca (PM - 3/22/2007 10:05:30 PM)
This might make for a fascinating longer thread at some point -- kind of RKers' guesses as to what we'll know post 2008.


Here's a guy I've wondered about: (PM - 3/22/2007 10:31:54 PM)
In *** Vanity Fair, the gay marriage-bashing [Karl] Rove swoons on about the first time he laid eyes on Dubya:

"I can literally remember what he was wearing: An Air National Guard flight jacket, cowboy boots, blue jeans ... he was exuding more charisma than any one individual should be allowed to have ... you know, wow."

http://www.metrotime...


Sorry for the typos (Rebecca - 3/22/2007 9:43:18 PM)
Sorry for the typos in the introduction to the previous post. I really can spell (most of the time).


Obfuscation of Justice (hereinva - 3/22/2007 10:12:51 PM)
It becomes more obvious each day when another story reveals that "justice" under the DOJ was bought and sold like a commodity. (ouch) The latest comes from todays WAPO-
Prosecutor Says Bush Appointees Interfered With Tobacco Case
[http://www.washingto...]

In America, there are no kings...let the questioning (oversight) begin !
 



Conspiracies (Rebecca - 3/23/2007 10:18:53 AM)
Don't be embarrassed to believe in conspiracies. Please look up the word in the dictionary. There are two roots in the word, spiro (breathe) and con (with) which together mean to breathe together. That means more than one person talking, planning, and working together for a common outcome.

Of course this could even be applied to the Democratic Party. Generally though we think of a conspiracy as something nefarious which happens in secret. If that is true we must admit they are going on all the time. The theoretical part is because we may not have proof that a particular conspiracy is happening.

However, Watergate was a conspiracy and was found out. In short, believing in conspiracies does not make you a kook, and it doesn't mean some aren't real. In cases where there is some proof and a proven record that the parties involved have engaged in criminal activities in the past, I'd say believing in some conspiracies is realistic. We would be neglegent in protecting our democracy if we took the naive view that no one would ever conspire to eliminate it.



Sorry....(yawn).... (Detcord - 3/23/2007 9:02:31 PM)
...I'm having a hard time caring about this and it's just boring. 


Breaking -- Gonzales was involved in firings (PM - 3/23/2007 9:45:25 PM)
WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales approved plans to fire several U.S. attorneys in a November meeting, according to documents released Friday that contradict earlier claims that he was not closely involved in the dismissals.

The Nov. 27 meeting, in which the attorney general and at least five top Justice Department officials participated, focused on a five-step plan for carrying out the firings of the prosecutors, Justice Department officials said late Friday.

http://news.yahoo.co...



Who'a thought it? (Rebecca - 3/24/2007 5:08:13 PM)
I'm sorry to have to say that I see a lot of "minorites" get ahead by kissing the behinds of the corporatist criminals. We had hoped that they would support the down trodden when they made it, but maybe the "powers that be" don't want THAT kind of person in positions of power. It seems we are getting a lot of tokens and flunkies.


The Gonzales eight remain (Teddy - 3/24/2007 6:13:15 PM)
in place, however questionable their appointments, even if Bush sacrifices Alberto, right? And they will loyally do the republican dirty work, just as Scalia and Alito and Clarence Thomas and so on, judge by judge, will continue in their scurrilous ways. I wonder what underhanded things these clunkers have done?  Remember Anita Hill and Thomas? Ugh, it is discouraging sometimes. The republicans get caught in all sorts of questionable activities, it blows over, and they continue on their way, unrepentent and unreconstructed--- except for a low-ranking sacrificial lamb here and there.


Let's Not Forget Mueller and the FBI Also (connie - 3/24/2007 6:07:00 PM)
Another travesty of justice has gotten pushed off the front page due to the U.S. Attorney mess, but I hope the media don't let go of the story of how the FBI obtained personal information about U.S. citizens in contravention of the Patriot Act.  (As if the provisions of the Patriot Act, when followed, weren't enough of an intrusion upon citzens' civil rights).

I watched the entire C-span coverage of Robert Mueller's "oops I'm sorry" testimony about how phone and other records were requested by the FBI under allegedly emergency circumstances, some of which weren't really emergencies, and how a recent audit showed that the FBI systematically failed to follow up with the safeguards built into the Patriot Act to seek formal approval for a request for information after the information was obtained.

If the head of the Army had to resign because of what took place at Walter Reed, Mueller should have already vacated the District of Columbia, but he hasn't.  And our President hasn't asked for his resignation either.