In the Post Dan Eggen provides a few more key nuggets in the Domenici/Iglesias timeline …
Domenici’s remarks came four days after Iglesias alleged that two New Mexico lawmakers had called him in mid-October and pressured him about the pace of the investigation. Iglesias, one of eight U.S. attorneys fired by the Justice Department, said he believed the calls were at the root of his dismissal.
…
Two sources with knowledge of the calls have said that Wilson made the first contact, followed by Domenici about a week later. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because they did not want to be named discussing the matter before a congressional hearing tomorrow.
The Justice Department said last night that Domenici called Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty during the first week of October to discuss Iglesias.
This followed three calls to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales in September 2005, January 2006 and April 2006 during which, Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said, Domenici “expressed general concerns about the performance of U.S. Attorney Iglesias and questioned whether he was up to the job . . .
“At no time in those calls did the senator mention this corruption case,” nor did he specifically ask for Iglesias’s ouster, Roehrkasse said.
The spokesman said he was not aware of any similar calls or complaints to the Justice Department from Wilson.
Be interesting to see what Iglesias can add to the mix.
TPM Reader RS chimes in from near San Diego …
I wonder who the “the few conservative congressmen” are who were complaining about Carol Lam. I live in Duke’s district and the only congressman here who has complained publicly is Darrell Issa.
Duncan Hunter has been strangely silent and he’s usually the first one to feign outrage on an immigration issue. Hunter was involved with Duke in pressuring the Pentagon to give Brent Wilkes some of his contracts so I expect the FBI is investigating him.
While I have read in the press that Issa and “other members of congress” have complained about Lam, those others have never been publicly identifed. Locally, neither Hunter nor Brian Bilbray (duke’s successor) issued any press releases about this matter.
Interns!
We have two slots opening for spring cycle interns here at TPM. Our interns work out of our offices in Manhattan. It’s a great opportunity to get experience working in new media with the oldest values in journalism. Interns get hands-on experience doing everything from formatting photographs documents and articles, to online research to writing for our news blogs. These two new interns will be closely involved in all aspects of our coming redesign and relaunch of the site.
If you live in the New York area and you’re interested in our internship, please send an email to the comments email address on the upper right. Include the subject heading ‘TPM Internship’. Include a resume and a brief description of your interest in the gig.
On the matter of Mr. Iglesias’s testimony on Tuesday, let’s remember a few things. Sen. Domenici (R-NM) and the political appointees at the Justice Department have strong motivations for supporting each others claims about management shortcomings during Mr. Iglesias’s tenure — despite the fact that there appears to be little if any evidence for this prior to Iglesias’s ouster. Domenici has already if not lied then intentionally misled the public about his contacts with Iglesias. Remember, when first asked about Iglesias’s claims about calls to his office from members of the New Mexico delegation, Domenici said “I have no idea what he’s talking about.” It’s only by the most generous and clement interpretation that that statement doesn’t peg Domenici as a liar. So he’s already misled the public and taken an action which even by the most innocent reading appears to violate congressional ethics rules. He doesn’t have much credibility. The folks at Main Justice don’t have much either when you consider that they’ve run through several different explanations at this point for why Iglesias was fired.
So let’s see what Iglesias says. He’s levelled extremely serious charges. So he deserves scrutiny too. But let’s not miss that we’re about to witness that most familiar of Bush era storylines, the whistleblower heading into the buzzsaw, with the full panoply of DOJ, Republican senators, National Review yakkers and RNC smearlords ready to crank up the noise machine to make sure Iglesias is too bashed and bruised by the end of the week to make his charges amount to anything.
Conservative blogger posts a petition demanding that CPAC nix future Ann Coulter appearances in the wake of her “faggot” comment.
Will others follow suit?
A view from an anonymous TPM Reader in the trenches …
I’m an Assistant United States Attorney in [*******], and am, of course, outraged by the U.S. Attorney purge, as most AUSAs are. I appreciate all the work you’ve been doing on this story.
My own sense is that this purge has to be viewed as part a much larger story on the devastating impact of this administration’s policies on the institution of the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
From a fiscal perspective, the administration has essentially abandoned the U.S. Attorney’s Offices. That has led to a precipitous drop in the numbers of federal prosecutions, particularly in larger districts like Los Angeles. The effects of the budget crisis at U.S. Attorney’s Offices across the nation are well documented.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime _blog/files/usao_ltr_final.pdf. True to form, Alberto Gonzales has virtually ignored these problems, despite congressional inquiries.
Likewise, from a policy perspective, the administration’s War on Terror (TM) policies and practices have undermined the sacred foundations of the work we do as federal prosecutors. I strive every day to make sure that the Fourth Amendment rights of evn the worst criminals are scrupulously observed, only to learn that the folks I work for view those rights as disposable, inconvenient anachronisms. I operate in a criminal justice system properly designed to maximize due process for even the worst criminals, only to watch the administration kick and scream when forced to provide even the most basic due process rights to suspected terrorists.
And now the purges. So they’ve slashed U.S. Attorney’s budgets, trashed rights we have sworn to uphold, and now, tried to toady-up the ranks of our leadership by firing some of our best and brightest, apparently to make room for wingnut-annointed political hacks. Folks who do stuff like this deserve
to get caught.One final note: U.S. Attorneys are referred to as the top law enforcement officers in their districts — even the FBI answers to the U.S. Attorney because the FBI can’t bring cases without the U.S. Attorney. Can you imagine if the administration had treated the FBI the way they’ve treated the U.S. Attorney’s Offices? Of course not — they wouldn’t dare. Because the public understands all too well what happens when the FBI’s integrity is undermined or its leadership politicized (see J. Edgar Hoover’s tenure).
The very same dangers lurk here. Thanks for helping to bring them to light.
Funny request: are you a) a Tivo subscriber, b) a Time Warner Cable subscriber and c) do you live in Manhattan? If you’re ‘yes’ to all three, can you shoot us an email? Thanks much.
Purged prosecutors to testify before both the House and Senate tomorrow.
(Update: In anticipation of tomorrow’s hearing, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) put out the following statement: “The plot continues to thicken. No one believes anymore these U.S. Attorneys were fired for any good reason and we will start to uncover the real truth at our hearing on Tuesday.”)