Hatch Act Investigation

Possible ‘Illegal’ White House Activity Probed

By DEB RIECHMANN

AP

WASHINGTON (April 25) – A little-known federal investigative unit has launched a probe into allegations of illegal political activity within the executive branch, including a White House office led by President Bush ‘s close adviser, Karl Rove .

The new investigation, which began several weeks ago, grew out of two other investigations still under way at the U.S. Office of Special Counsel: the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias from New Mexico and a presentation by Rove aide J. Scott Jennings to political appointees at the General Services Administration on how to help Republican  candidates in 2008.

“We’re in the preliminary stages of opening this expanded investigation,” Loren Smith, a spokesman for the special counsel’s office, an independent investigative and prosecutorial agency, said Tuesday. “The recent suggestion of illegal political activities across the executive branch was the basis we used to decide that it was important to look into possible violations of the Hatch Act.”

The office, led by Scott J. Bloch, enforces the Hatch Act, a 70-year-old law that bars federal employees from engaging in political activities using government resources or on government time.

Whether politics played an inappropriate part in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys, including Iglesias, was at the heart of the controversy that has threatened Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ job. Whether executive branch employees violated federal laws that restrict them from using their posts for political activity also is at the center of the controversy about the January meeting at GSA.

“Six participants have confirmed that, at the end of the presentation, GSA Administrator Lurita Doan asked all present to consider how they could use GSA to ‘help our candidates’ in 2008,'” 25 Democrats wrote in a letter of complaint on Monday to White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten.

Among questions the senators asked Bolten:

-“Why did Mr. Jennings and his staff communicate the presentation materials which bear the White House seal, via a private e-mail account affiliated with the Republican National Committee?”

-“Does the White House consider the preparation and delivery of such a presentation to be an appropriate use of taxpayer funds?”

The Los Angeles Times, which first reported the wider inquiry, said Doan doesn’t recall making such comments.

The White House said it had not yet been contacted by the Office of Special Counsel on the matter.

White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said Tuesday that it was entirely appropriate for the president’s staff to provide informational briefings to appointees throughout the federal government about the political landscape in which they implement the president’s policies. The White House said there have been other briefings at other agencies.

“People take great care to make sure that they don’t violate the Hatch Act,” Perino said, “and the Hatch Act doesn’t prohibit the giving of informational briefings to governmental employees.”

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press.

The e-mails: Gonzales caught in a lie?

Gonzales aide floated replacements early on

E-Mails appear to contradict DOJ statements on genesis of attorney firings.

WASHINGTON – The attorney general’s former top aide identified five Bush administration insiders as potential replacements for sitting U.S. attorneys months before those prosecutors were fired, contrary to repeated suggestions from the Justice Department that no such list had been drawn up, according to documents released yesterday.

E-mails sent to the White House in January and May of 2006 by D. Kyle Sampson, then chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, name potential replacements for U.S. attorneys in San Diego, San Francisco, Little Rock and Grand Rapids.

The disclosures contrast with previous statements from Sampson and other Justice officials. They have said that only Tim Griffin, a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove who was later appointed the top federal prosecutor in Little Rock, had been identified as a replacement candidate before the dismissals of the sitting U.S. attorneys.

“These documents uncover one of the most central and disconcerting contradictions we’ve seen so far,” said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). “We have been told that there were no backups in mind to replace the fired U.S. attorneys, and these documents make it clear that there were.”

‘Sampson’s initial thoughts’
Sampson’s attorney and a Justice spokesman said yesterday that the candidates listed were only tentative suggestions and were never seriously considered. Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the list “reflects Kyle Sampson’s initial thoughts” and “in no way contradicts the department’s prior statements” about the lack of a candidate list.

Sampson told the Senate Judiciary Committee last month that on Dec. 7, when seven U.S. attorneys were sacked, “I did not have in mind any replacements for any of the seven who were asked to resign.”

The names of the potential replacements were part of nearly 2,400 pages of documents related to the firings released by the Justice Department yesterday. They include more complete versions of e-mails and memos previously released.

The documents provide new details about a range of topics, including the Justice Department’s focus on its prosecutors’ conservative political credentials and the evolving justifications for the firings.

The release came as Gonzales continued intensive preparations for testimony next Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Democrats plan to focus on the Justice Department’s numerous conflicting statements about the firings and on Gonzales’s shifting explanations of his role. A number of Republicans have joined Democrats in demanding that Gonzales resign.

List included administration insiders
Seven U.S. attorneys were fired in December, and another was dismissed earlier in 2006, as part of a plan that originated in the White House to replace some prosecutors based in part on their perceived disloyalty to President Bush and his policies. The uproar over the removals has grown amid allegations that some Republican lawmakers improperly contacted prosecutors about investigations and assertions by Democrats that the firings may have been an attempt to disrupt public-corruption probes.

The possible replacements listed by Sampson in early 2006 were all high-level administration officials, including two suggestions for San Diego who were later given other U.S. attorney postings: Jeffrey A. Taylor, now chief prosecutor in the District, and Deborah Rhodes, now the U.S. attorney in Alabama. Both were career prosecutors in San Diego before taking senior Justice jobs.

Other candidates included Rachel L. Brand, head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy, who was considered to replace western Michigan’s prosecutor, and Daniel Levin, a former senior Justice and White House official who was listed as a San Francisco candidate, the memos show.

Sampson, who resigned as Gonzales’s top aide last month, said in prepared Senate testimony last month that “none of the U.S. attorneys was asked to resign in favor of a particular individual who had already been identified to take the vacant spot,” except for the prosecutor in Little Rock.

Replacements hadn’t been picked, lawyer says
Sampson’s attorney, Bradford A. Berenson, said yesterday that “testimony regarding the consideration of replacements was entirely accurate” and that “Kyle had none in mind” at the time the firings were carried out.

“Some names had been tentatively suggested for discussion much earlier in the process, but by the time the decision to ask for the resignations was made, none had been chosen to serve as a replacement,” he said.

Roehrkasse said that Brand had expressed interest in becoming the U.S. attorney in Grand Rapids but later decided against it.

One document also raises new questions about the firing of prosecutor David C. Iglesias in New Mexico, who has testified that he felt pressured by Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) and Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.) to speed up indictments of Democrats before last November’s elections.

Two pages of handwritten notes by Monica M. Goodling, until recently Gonzales’s senior counselor, include this criticism of Iglesias: “Domenici says he doesn’t move cases.” The notes are undated but appear amid a set of documents relating to meetings in February of this year.

Domenici and Wilson have admitted calling Iglesias but have denied pressuring him. Domenici called Gonzales or his deputy four times to complain about Iglesias, and Gonzales also fielded complaints about him last fall from Bush and Rove.

Evolution of a rebuttal
The documents show the evolution of March 6 testimony from William E. Moschella, the principal associate deputy attorney general, to a House subcommittee. Draft versions written just days before he appeared begin with a declaration that Justice “strongly opposes” efforts to revoke Gonzales’s new authority to appoint interim U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation. The scandal mushroomed in ensuing days, however, and Moschella’s testimony was reshaped as the department backed down on the legislation.

The documents also reveal new details about the Justice Department’s efforts to contain the political damage as controversy over the firings grew. On March 5, for example, chief Justice spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos sent an e-mail to White House aides saying that Moschella should focus on admitting mistakes related to how prosecutors were notified of their dismissals.

“We are trying to muddy the coverage up a bit by trying to put the focus on the process in which they were told,” Scolinos wrote, adding that “I don’t know if the Senate Dems will let this go until it is all out in the open.”

Also released yesterday was a chart given to Gonzales in February that noted U.S. attorneys’ political backgrounds and whether they were members of the Federalist Society, a coalition of conservative lawyers and legal scholars with close ties to the Bush administration. It is not clear when the chart was compiled, nor is it clear whether the Federalist Society information is accurate.

Another document, compiling internal Justice Department “talking points” about the fired prosecutors, disparages two U.S. attorneys — in identical language — about immigration enforcement.

Article can be found at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18100126

Excerpts from DOJ docs released yesterday:

The Justice Department on Friday released 2,400 documents to congressional panels investigating whether the firings last year of the U.S. attorneys were politically motivated.

___

Kyle Sampson, then-chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, wrote an Jan. 9, 2006, e-mail to then-White House Counsel Harriet Miers suggesting replacements for several U.S. attorneys who would be fired nearly a year later:

“PLEASE TREAT THIS AS CONFIDENTIAL. …

“Margaret M. Chiara. Replacement candidates: Rachel Brand?

“Harry E. ‘Bud’ Cummins III. Replacement candidates: Tim Griffin?”

On March 29, under questioning from Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Sampson said he had no replacements for the fired U.S. attorneys last Dec. 7, when the first wave of them were fired.

___

“Domenici says he doesn’t move cases.” _ Then-Gonzales counsel Monica Goodling, in undated, handwritten notes apparently setting out reasons for the dismissals. In New Mexico, U.S. Attorney David Iglesias was fired in part because of criticism by Republican Sen. Pete Domenici.

___

The Bush administration and congressional Republicans conferred closely on how to handle testimony earlier this year from the fired U.S. attorneys and current Justice Department officials:

“Crystal and Dan Flores just called me. They are all geared up and ready to go after the former USA witnesses coming next week.” _ Feb. 28 e-mail from Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling to other Justice Department officials, referring to aides to House Judiciary Committee Republicans preparing for testimony by the fired U.S. attorneys.

___

The White House reached out to Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., to fight off Democratic charges that Griffin was unqualified:

“WH political reached out to Sen. Sessions and requested that he ask helpful questions to make clear that Tim Griffin is qualified to serve.

“They requested that someone in our (Office of Legislative Affairs) call the senator’s staff and make sure that we take advantage of the offer.” _ Goodling, in a Jan. 17 e-mail to Hertling. She also included talking points on Griffin “as well as a narrative that can be used by staff and his resume.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18098314

 

Fire Alberto Gonzales

Gingrich Suggests Gonzales Should Resign

Former House Speaker Slams Attorney General Over Firings

By HOPE YEN (AP)

WASHINGTON (April 8) – Joining a growing list of Republicans, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should consider resigning. The possible presidential candidate said the botched firing of U.S. attorneys has destroyed Gonzales’ credibility as the nation’s top law enforcer.

“I think the country, in fact, would be much better served to have a new team at the Justice Department, across the board,” Gingrich said. “I cannot imagine how he is going to be effective for the rest of this administration. … They’re going to be involved in endless hearings.”

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who is helping lead the investigation into the firing of eight federal prosecutors, said Gingrich’s comments pointed to building bipartisan support for a new attorney general.

“This is another important voice who believes that the attorney general should step down for the good of the country and the good of the department,” Schumer said in a statement. “We hope both the attorney general and the president heed Speaker Gingrich’s message.”

Gonzales, a former White House counsel who became attorney general in 2005, is scheduled to testify April 17 before the Senate  Judiciary Committee. It is a congressional showdown believed to be a make-or-break appearance for Gonzales.

The committee also has pledged to compel the testimony of White House officials such as Karl Rove  and former counsel Harriet Miers to determine the extent of White House involvement. On Friday, Monica Goodling, the Justice Department’s liaison to the White House, abruptly quit after telling Congress  she would not testify.

After the firings earlier this year, Gonzales initially asserted that the dismissals were performance-related, not based on political considerations, and that he was not directly involved in the decisions.

But testimony from his former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, as well as e-mails between the department and the White House contradicted those claims, leading to a public apology from Gonzales.

On Sunday, Gingrich harshly criticized Gonzales’ judgment in allowing the firings to escalate into such a political scandal.

Gingrich noted that a president has every right to fire U.S. attorneys for any reason. Therefore, he said, all Gonzales had to do was to say that Bush wanted new people. Instead, Gingrich said, the attorney general made a series of misstatements from which he was forced later to backtrack.

“This is the most mishandled, artificial, self-created mess that I can remember in the years I’ve been active in public life,” Gingrich said. “The buck has to stop somewhere, and I’m assuming it’s the attorney general and his immediate team.”

In recent weeks, several Republicans have joined Democrats in saying Gonzales should consider resigning, including Sens. John Sununu of New Hampshire and Gordon Smith of Oregon and Reps. Dana Rohrabacher of California, Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Lee Terry of Nebraska.

Other Republicans, including administration allies Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas, have acknowledged that Gonzales badly mishandled the matter and needed to explain himself quickly.

“I think the confusion and the ham-handed way that these firings was done certainly undermines the confidence of the Justice Department,” Kyl said Sunday. “And part of his effort to come up and testify before the Hill will be to restore some of that confidence.”

Schumer said the controversy is the latest evidence of a leadership failure at the department.

“The gravity of this situation is shown by the fact that several Republicans have called for the attorney general to resign,” he said. “The fact that the attorney general is the president’s friend and was the president’s counsel for years does not alone make him qualified to be attorney general.”

Gingrich and Schumer appeared on “Fox News Sunday,” and Kyl spoke on ABC’s “This Week.”

In an Internet poll, nearly 65,000 respondents stated “yes” when asked if Gonzales should resign.  Nearly as many stated “no” when asked if they thought Gonzales would resign.

Gonzales needs to join Sampson and Goodling in the unemployment line.

Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” Schumer cited a Washington Post article about Gonzales’ handling of the Bernie Kerik nomination to the top post with Homeland Security as evidence of Gonzales’ incompetence.