We’re coming up on 1500 contributors to our DC Muckraking Fundraising Drive. And we’re hoping to get to 2000 by the end of the day.
As I explained yesterday, we’re doing this — trying to get people to become contributors/subscribers in the sense you do with PBS — because we want to do more muckraking, more digging into stories like the US Attorney Purge. And to do that we need to bring on new reporter-bloggers, particularly one or more right there on Capitol Hill. Who’s really pressing oversight, who’s not? How is the place being run? What stories are hiding there in plain sight?
That’s what we’re trying to do. If you want to join us by contributing a few dollars to hire those reporter-bloggers you can click here to find out how to send a check in the mail or click the button below to make a contribution online.
See Tony Snow today on the little issue of that 18-day gap in the emails turned over to Congress.
First DCCC ad of 2008 cycle hammers GOP Rep. Heather Wilson over Attorney Purge scandal.
Don’t miss our video of Al Gore tearing into global warming skepticism in D.C. today.
Did the Justice Department stifle the New Hampshire phone jamming investigation?
The Democrats made the case today in a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT).
Behind-the-scenes tensions among House Dems on full boil right now over tomorrow’s big Iraq withdrawal bill vote.
I’ve had a hard time setting aside time to write considered post on the president’s press conference. But I thought one of the most telling points is that even now he can’t see clear to simply saying they were fired. Maybe ‘fired’ is too blunt a word. Maybe ‘dismissed’ would be better. But if you watch his statement he repeatedly speaks about their ‘resignations’. Go back and watch the video and you’ll see what I mean.
Okay, enough. The president fired US Attorneys to stymie investigations of Republicans and punish US Attorneys who didn’t harass Democrats with bogus voter fraud prosecutions. In the former instance, the evidence remains circumstantial. But in the latter the evidence is clear, overwhelming and undeniable.
Indeed, it is so undeniable the president hismelf does not deny it.
The president himself says that in some cases US Attorneys were dismissed because they were too lax in prosecuting election fraud. What he does not say — but what we know directly from the accounts of the players involved — is that these were cases in which Republican operatives and activists complained to the White House and Republican members of Congress that certain US Attorneys weren’t convening grand juries or issuing indictments against Democrats, even though these were cases where all the available evidence suggests there was no wrongdoing prosecuted. (It’s all reminiscent of the bogus voter fraud allegations Republicans got caught peddling in the South Dakota senate race in 2002. Only in this case getting these charges into the press wasn’t enough; they wanted to use US Attorneys to actual harrass people or put them in jail.)
We know that Republican members of Congress sought to pressure the prosecutors in question to push these indictments. And we know at least in the case of David Iglesias in New Mexico that Sen. Domenici’s (R-NM) complaints after not being able to get Iglesias to knuckle under were directly tied to his dismissal.
Back up a bit from the sparks flying over executive privilege and congressional testimony and you realize that these are textbook cases of the party in power interfering or obstructing the administration of justice for narrowly partisan purposes. It’s a direct attack on the rule of law.
This much is already clear in the record. And we’re now having a big public debate about the politics for each side if the president tries to obstruct the investigation and keep the truth from coming out. The contours and scope of executive privilege is one issue, and certainly an important one. But in this case it is being used as no more than a shield to keep the full extent of the president’s perversion of the rule of law from becoming known.
It’s yet another example of how far this White House has gone in normalizing behavior that we’ve been raised to associate with third-world countries where democracy has never successfully taken root and the rule of law is unknown. At most points in our history the idea that an Attorney General could stay in office after having overseen such an effort would be unthinkable. The most telling part of this episode is that they’re not even really denying the wrongdoing. They’re ignoring the point or at least pleading ‘no contest’ and saying it’s okay.
WaPo …
The leader of the Justice Department team that prosecuted a landmark lawsuit against tobacco companies said yesterday that Bush administration political appointees repeatedly ordered her to take steps that weakened the government’s racketeering case.
Sharon Y. Eubanks said Bush loyalists in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales’s office began micromanaging the team’s strategy in the final weeks of the 2005 trial, to the detriment of the government’s claim that the industry had conspired to lie to U.S. smokers.