Time for a pep talk for the Kos cult.

Older and Wiser Heads

This is NOT a partisan issue any more. Republicans who respect the law and revere the honor and traditions of the Department of Justice are just as horrified as anyone who regularly swims here in the Lake. So, I thought I would give you some idea of the thoughts and opinions (publicly expressed–The Law Journal even had a reporter there–so I'm not telling tales out of school) of people of far greater stature and experience than I on the havoc that has been wrought by this administration.

Well, well, well. At least we now have an admission that the Democrats have been playing politics with this whole issue, up to this point. :)

The whole honor and traditions part is funny, given that the practice has been, according to Democrat sources, to throw all of these bums out on their collective keisters with every change of the administration. How much honor and tradition can there be when the entire population is replaced every 4 or 8 years?

If you want to "respect the law" then you should stop all your caterwauling and drop the whole thing. According to the law, the USAs serve at the pleasure of the President. Period. End of story.

Arnold Burns former Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan seemed truly distraught by this situation. He has gone so far as to write an OpEd for the NYTimes suggesting that the Attorney General be taken out of the President's Cabinet altogether and that DOJ become a totally merit based agency.

His goal? "The goal is an apolitical Department of Justice." He said that currently "DOJ has lost all its credibility. We have to address this both at the Main Justice level and in the US Attorney's Offices."

Awe, how cute and sweet. The nice Republican man wants an apolitical DOJ. Who's going to disagree with that? Not I. Not Bush. Not Gonzales. The fact of the matter is that the DOJ has ALWAYS been part of the executive branch and, as such, is by definition a political entity. If it is not, then why are the new administrations replacing everybody? This is nothing new under Bush. This is all smoke and mirrors.

On this, the panel was unanimous. There is NEVER EVER a right way for a Senator (or any other politician) to attempt to complain about an individual case. However, let's say the Senator felt that the US Attorney was not paying enough attention to a particular category of case. Well, in that circumstance, there would be a place for that Senator to complain–the Office of Legislative Affairs. OLA's job is to act as a buffer and to insulate United States Attorneys from political pressure.

So, our elected representatives aren't allowed to NEVER EVER attempt to complain about an individual case? That's a laugh.

How about all those Democrat Senators complaining about the Plame flap, or the Rove investigations, or the Libby case? Schumer seems to be complaining about something along those lines all the time.

If it will get Schumer to STFU, I'll even vote with you on this point. The problem is that you [the Democrats] don't intend to, and never do, apply this type of reasoning in a bi-partisan manner. This type of rationale is reserved to the exclusive use of Democrats against Republicans.

But even if we take ALL of the politics out of it, doesn't a Senator ... or any citizen for that matter ... have a right to object to how the DOJ and the USAs are doing their jobs? Even on specific cases?

Do you honestly believe that someone who has been in the Senate as long as Pete Domenici wouldn't know that? No wonder Iglesias felt sick to his stomach after the phone call. It's on a par with Comey wondering to himself whether or not he was going to have to "physically" intervene to prevent Gonzales from having Ashcroft sign on the dotted line during the Wednesday Night Ambush. And far from acting as a buffer from political pressure, it seems that Mr. Hertlinger thinks the current OLA's job is to stifle any former or current USA who gets ask to provide information to Congress. Yes, my blood is beginning to boil!

FDL liberal drivel and whining. Nothing important (or even novel) here.

There was a great deal of discussion of ways to change the system by which Attorneys General and US Attorneys are selected and Arnold Burns' suggestion was that they serve for a longer fixed term that is NOT co-terminus with the President's. Such a system is currently in place for the FBI Director.

Fair enough. But it is irrelevant to the case of the USAs since this is NOT how things operate today.

But Bernard Nussbaum, former Counsel to President Clinton, pointed out that current selection system (which is virtually the same way we pick and confirm federal judges) is not the problem. He said "GOOD PEOPLE can make this system work." [emphasis his].

Oooh. Bernard Nussbaum thinks Bush and Gonzales are "BAD PEOPLE". I bet that they are shaking in their boots right about now. :)

This sentiment was echoed by former USA SDNY Mary Jo White, who pointed out that the so called "political" selection of US Attorneys had, at least in NY, in the main, resulted in a merit based selection. I can attest that, thanks in large measure to the truly bipartisan approach taken by Senators Moynihan and Javits and their reverence for excellence, and the really heavy lifting Chuck Schumer has done to continue in their footsteps, the Empire State has been particularly blessed in our US Attorneys. Some were/are better than others, but there hasn't been a wanker in generations.

Hmmm. So the "political" selections of USAs has resulted in "merit based selection." Curious, I thought that "political" selections where the problem here. WTF? So, "political" selections are "GOOD" but only if they are not "Republican" selections. I see. Nope, no partisan notions there. Uh huh.

And what's all this about the Senators now. Aren't they supposed to stay out of the whole DOJ thing? I think that the writer needs to review his text a little more before hitting "submit".

And yes, NY is blessed with their USAs. I know that when I think about the fair and even-handed application of the law, the NY USAs come right to mind.

Richard Briffault, the Joseph Chamberlain Professor of Legislation at Columbia Law School, echoed that as well. "The better and more professional the persons appointed, the more we want to support this system and keep them as holdovers [referring to President Carter's decision to allow USA SDNY Robert Fiske–a legend–to finish out his term which had two more years to go instead of replacing him with a Democrat when Carter took office]. The more partisan the appointees, the more we want to have them fired [when a new administration comes in].

Again, who's going to argue with this? Not I. Not Bush. Not Gonzales.

But in a sense, this is exactly what has happened. The Bush DOJ decided people were being partisan and fired their butts. Simple as that. No conspiracy or government take-over theories required.

Alan Vinegrad asked another question that brought a unanimous response from the panel when he wanted to know what the criteria for selective removal of USAs [as opposed to the wholesale removal when a new president is sworn in] would be. They all agreed, there have been only two reasons:

-misconduct

-severe management problems.

That's it.

OK. Acting in a partisan manner by refusing to investigate and prosecute cases of voter fraud is, IMHO, a fine example of what? Misconduct.

Selectively applying the law is a blight on our judicial system which should not be tolerated.

When I say misconduct, we are talking about things like a US Attorney getting indicted himself. When I say major management problems, I'm talking about an office in complete disarray, the financials don't match up, the career people are leaving in droves, the judges are complaining.

More FDL drivel and blather. Merely seeks to frame the use of these terms to the Democrats advantage in this case ... and not very skillfully so.

Prof. Briffault pointed out that the Congressional Research Service did a little audit and found that in the 25 years from 1982 until the beginning of 2006, only 10, yes 10 TOTAL US Attorneys were selectively removed.

A nice, but meaningless statistic. The only thing that this proves is that it has been done before, so why are you complaining now? Answer: Partisan politics.

Mary Jo White had an interesting observation towards the end of the evening. After pointing out the tradition in the SDNY that in order to be considered to be USA there, you had to have served the office previously in a career capacity, and opining that it would not be fair to the USA to appoint someone who had never been a prosecutor before because they "wouldn't have a clue" of how to do the job; she noted that "those who devised this plan were young political operatives with no understanding of DOJ or its traditions. Alberto Gonzales had no federal experience. Harriet Myers had no federal experience." Mary Jo, quite charitably, noted that they had no idea how DOJ is supposed to work and for 6 years had no experience with a Congress composed of a loyal opposition, so there were never any grownups in charge.

You can blame Rove. Like Tweety, you can say this has Cheney's fingerprints all over it.

Sour grapes. Childish temper tantrum because things didn't go like she would have preferred. Key clues: references to a lack of "grownups in charge" and in later text "Kiddie Kampers".

But me, I blame the President. After the Wednesday Night Ambush, he knew he had principled people in pretty high places at DOJ. There WERE some grownups in charge. Instead of relying on that expertise and experience, he allowed Kyle Sampson to try to strip Comey of the DAG's traditional role with respect to supervision of the US Attorneys, and eventually, once Comey was gone, the power of the DAG's office was gone before McNulty came in, and Alberto Gonzales was installed as AG. He put the Kiddie Kampers in charge.

More FDL blather. FDL must like to hear themselves type or something. :)

Last night there was talk of whether everyone hired in the last 6-8 months needs to go. Imagine how disruptive that would be to the Department's work. Comey was right, I don't know how you put the genie back in the bottle, or where you go to get the Department's reputation back.

Translation: We're going to be every bit as partisan as those damn Bushies were. Fire every last one of the bastards and put our own guys back in office.

Hmmm, what ever happened to that merit based talk I was just reading about?

So, the only good news here is for the criminals, oh yeah and the terrorists. I remember the days when Dave Kelley and Pat Fitzgerald with the support and, yes, insulation from Main Justice from Mary Jo White, were actually building cases and putting terrorists in jail. I remember when they were able to foil plots before anyone got hurt or any computer networks melted down. I remember when terrorist atrocities were met with competent evidence, indictments returned on probable cause and convictions gained after trial.

Yes, yes. I know. The entire free world is going to end now that Bush fired some USAs. I mean they were the equivalent of Captain America or something. Foiling plots. Building cases. Putting innocent people terrorists in jail.

Yea? Well they missed the big ones, I guess, because there is still a hole in the ground where the WTC once stood. Grownups, indeed.

[ Queue the National Anthem followed by
God "Non-religious Sectarian Authority Figure" Bless "bestow his/her favor and good will upon" America! ]

[ Queue the waving of the flags. ]

[ Speaker steps to the podium. ]

I remember what the rule of law looked like. More importantly, I remember what it felt like. It made me proud to be an American. It made me proud to know that although there were scary bad men out there who wanted to hurt us, grownups–talented, smart, hardworking, sincere and honorable grownups–were in charge. It was their respect for the Constitution, for both the spirit and the letter of the law THAT made me feel safe.

As long as our system of Justice and our whole country is in the hands of the Kiddie Kampers, no one will feel safe…because no one will be safe.

[ Sarcastic theatrics inserted by me. :) ]

This is laughable. Scary bad men? Grownups? Kiddie Kampers? What are we, in second grade? The ego behind this twaddle is truly of epic proportions.

To sum up my reaction to this: [ Shrugs Shoulders ] Eh?!?