Posts
Due to the fact that I am still re-arranging this site, I am going to be posting news and opinions from various other places for most of the day.
Here's a piece on the US Attorney firings on how high up the ladder this went, from Daily Kos.
"Voter Fraud" Takes Center Stage in Prosecutor Purge
by MissLaura Tue Mar 13, 2007 at 02:20:52 AM PDT
There'll be enough in the new Washington Post and New York Times articles on the prosecutor purge to keep us busy for a while - there's the resignation of Gonzales' chief of staff, the involvement of Harriet Miers, and of course the obvious, that they wanted to fire all the U.S. Attorneys, just for a start, and more seems likely to emerge. Mcjoan already got the ball rolling; I'm going to pick out a few pieces related to David Iglesias in particular.
Sampson sent an e-mail to Miers in March 2005 that ranked all 93 U.S. attorneys. Strong performers "exhibited loyalty" to the administration; low performers were "weak U.S. attorneys who have been ineffectual managers and prosecutors, chafed against Administration initiatives, etc." A third group merited no opinion.
...
Only three of those eventually fired were given low rankings: Margaret Chiara in Grand Rapids, Mich.; Bud Cummins in Little Rock; and Carol S. Lam in San Diego. Two were given strong evaluations: David C. Iglesias in Albuquerque, who has alleged political interference from GOP lawmakers, and Kevin V. Ryan in San Francisco, whose firing has generated few complaints because of widespread management and morale problems in his office. - Washington Post
It's profoundly unsurprising that loyalty vs. chafing was used as an evaluation standard, but it's still always good to have in writing. What stands out most, though, is that final sentence. The two prosecutors who got strong evaluations were on the one hand the one whose firing has generated the most controversy as inappropriately politicized and on the other hand the apparently-incompetent one. That there is like the Bush administration in a nutshell. The only surprising thing is that the incompetent guy did end up getting fired.
Iglesias remained safe from the purge lists as late as September 2006, according to the WaPo.
Justice officials said Sampson added him in October, based in part on complaints from Sen. Pete V. Domenici and other New Mexico Republicans that he was not prosecuting enough voter-fraud cases.
The New York Times account adds that Bush was involved in the chain of complaint about Iglesias.
Last October, President Bush spoke with Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to pass along concerns by Republicans that some prosecutors were not aggressively addressing voter fraud, the White House said Monday. Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, was among the politicians who complained directly to the president, according to an administration official.
In other words, Iglesias' firing was absolutely, unequivocally a political matter - as the WaPo suggests, "voter fraud" is a partisan concern of Republicans. What it doesn't say directly, of course, is that these "voter fraud" allegations have been used to disenfranchise eligible voters, as in Florida in 2000, and to suppress voting in minority populations all over the country. "We're concerned about voter fraud" is Republican for "we're worried we'll lose - can you keep these people from voting?" Iglesias apparently didn't show sufficient partisan zeal in disenfranchising probable Democrats.
An interesting piece here, though, is the increasing dominance of voter fraud as an issue in the Iglesias firing. On March 3, the Washington Post reported that the firings had been approved by the White House and had been policy-related, but cited immigration and firearms as the policies in question. The Iglesias case stood out precisely because there was evidence that it was a more partisan issue: Rep. Heather Wilson and Sen. Pete Domenici had called to pressure Iglesias to indict Democrats in a construction kickbacks case.
Then, on Saturday, McLatchy reported that
Presidential advisor Karl Rove and at least one other member of the White House political team were urged by the New Mexico Republican party chairman to fire the state's U.S. attorney because of dissatisfaction in part with his failure to indict Democrats in a voter fraud investigation in the battleground election state.
Now voting issues - which Kagro X addressed in some detail on Saturday - continue to move to the center of the story. Where the corruption case that Domenici and Wilson pressured Iglesias over now fits in the story is an interesting question. Did Domenici call Iglesias about one case and complain to Bush about another issue? Did he complain about both? Clearly voting issues are of broader importance - pressuring one prosecutor on one case to affect an election is unethical, reprehensible behavior, but of limited scope. An administration-wide effort to push a type of prosecution used by Republicans against Democrats, and against disadvantaged populations that tend to vote Democratic, is an attempt to reshape the electoral terrain. So which was it, or was it both?
What cases the prosecutors were fired for not pursuing in a partisan enough manner is therefore a hugely important aspect of this story, with the Iglesias case providing a possible window in. One thing's clear, though. Whether he was more concerned with construction kickbacks or voter fraud, Pajamas Pete was thrilled to have Iglesias fired.
On the day of the Dec. 7 firings, Miers's deputy, William Kelley, wrote that Domenici's chief of staff "is happy as a clam" about Iglesias.
A week later, Sampson wrote: "Domenici is going to send over names tomorrow (not even waiting for Iglesias's body to cool)."
0 Comments:
Post a Comment