Quantcast
StarBulletin.com
Sunday, November 08, 2009

Search

HiLife Online

Sell your stuff in Hawaii classifieds
Subscribe to the Honolulu Star-Bulletin

Complete investigation of U.S. attorney firings is needed


POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Oct 01, 2008

(Single Page View) | Return to Paginated View

As the Bush administration limps through its final days, continuing an inquiry into the firing of U.S. attorneys for political purposes would seem pointless - except to restore trust and confidence in the institution duty bound to enforce laws without bias or partisanship.

Michael Mukasey, the third attorney general to serve President Bush, was correct to heed the call of the Justice Department's inspector general to appoint a federal prosecutor to investigate further.

Though a conclusion could be months if not years away, misconduct by administration officials shouldn't be allowed to pass. Unless someone is held accountable, the loose atmosphere that has prevailed during the past seven years would give license to future administrations and muddy ethical boundaries even more.

Mukasey's move was prompted by a 392-page report by the inspector general and the Office of Professional Responsibility, who had been examining the dismissals for 18 months. The report found "significant evidence that partisan political considerations were an important factor in the removal" of several U.S. attorneys.

However, because some key witnesses refused to cooperate - including former White House counsel and Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, Bush's former political adviser Karl Rove and former Justice liaison Monica Goodling - the investigation could not be completed, the report said.

Mukasey, in describing the dismissals as "haphazard, arbitrary and unprofessional," properly recognized that his department "has an obligation to the American people to pursue this case" regardless of whether the alleged culprits have left their jobs.

It is a departure from his earlier decision not to pursue legal action against former White House operatives who applied litmus tests of party affiliation and conservative views in hiring immigration judges and for other nonpolitical positions.

The difference is probably due to the level of authority involved with the report pointing at the White House, then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other department officials for playing major roles in the unprecedented firings and providing "inconsistent, misleading or inaccurate" statements.

The report is particularly critical of Gonzales, who it said "bears primary responsibility" for the messy episode and had "an extraordinary lack of recollection about the entire removal process," most remarkably a meeting in his conference room when he approved the dismissals.

The most serious case was that of David Iglesias, the U.S. attorney for New Mexico who was fired because of "complaints from New Mexico Republican politicians and party activists to the White House and the Department" that he would not bring voter fraud charges that would boost the party's chances in elections there.

Political considerations also were suspected in firing three other attorneys, including one who was pushed out to provide a job for a former Rove aide, the report said, but, unable to compel testimony, investigators were stymied.

The new prosecutor, armed with grand jury subpoenas, won't have that problem.

As the Bush administration limps through its final days, continuing an inquiry into the firing of U.S. attorneys for political purposes would seem pointless - except to restore trust and confidence in the institution duty bound to enforce laws without bias or partisanship.


Michael Mukasey, the third attorney general to serve President Bush, was correct to heed the call of the Justice Department's inspector general to appoint a federal prosecutor to investigate further.

Though a conclusion could be months if not years away, misconduct by administration officials shouldn't be allowed to pass. Unless someone is held accountable, the loose atmosphere that has prevailed during the past seven years would give license to future administrations and muddy ethical boundaries even more.

Mukasey's move was prompted by a 392-page report by the inspector general and the Office of Professional Responsibility, who had been examining the dismissals for 18 months. The report found "significant evidence that partisan political considerations were an important factor in the removal" of several U.S. attorneys.

However, because some key witnesses refused to cooperate - including former White House counsel and Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, Bush's former political adviser Karl Rove and former Justice liaison Monica Goodling - the investigation could not be completed, the report said.

Mukasey, in describing the dismissals as "haphazard, arbitrary and unprofessional," properly recognized that his department "has an obligation to the American people to pursue this case" regardless of whether the alleged culprits have left their jobs.

It is a departure from his earlier decision not to pursue legal action against former White House operatives who applied litmus tests of party affiliation and conservative views in hiring immigration judges and for other nonpolitical positions.

The difference is probably due to the level of authority involved with the report pointing at the White House, then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other department officials for playing major roles in the unprecedented firings and providing "inconsistent, misleading or inaccurate" statements.

The report is particularly critical of Gonzales, who it said "bears primary responsibility" for the messy episode and had "an extraordinary lack of recollection about the entire removal process," most remarkably a meeting in his conference room when he approved the dismissals.

The most serious case was that of David Iglesias, the U.S. attorney for New Mexico who was fired because of "complaints from New Mexico Republican politicians and party activists to the White House and the Department" that he would not bring voter fraud charges that would boost the party's chances in elections there.

Political considerations also were suspected in firing three other attorneys, including one who was pushed out to provide a job for a former Rove aide, the report said, but, unable to compel testimony, investigators were stymied.

The new prosecutor, armed with grand jury subpoenas, won't have that problem.

(Single Page View) | Return to Paginated View



Story tools

Email  Email   Print  Print   Save  Save   Popular  Most Popular   Reprint  Subscribe

Share this story






Today’s Edition

Hawaii News Features Sports Business Editorial Travel