While the RNC has been hitting the delete button for an estimated 51 out of 88 total White House officials who have been using the outside RNC e-mail accounts -- you read that correctly, destroyed e-mail records for 51 White House officials by the RNC the real world implications for this misconduct have already begun.
The fallout from the Bush Administration's political machinations at the DOJ is rippling outward into criminal prosecutions. From the LATimes (via reader Hilde):
The firing of the eight prosecutors last year has drawn attention because once appointed, U.S. attorneys traditionally have been allowed to serve until they resign or are ousted because of misconduct. New administrations routinely make changes as well.Gonzales has defended the dismissals as justified for performance reasons, saying that some of the prosecutors failed to follow administration law-enforcement priorities.But Democrats say there is evidence that the dismissals were part of a Bush administration effort to affect investigations in public corruption and voting cases that would assist Republicans. The probe has also shown that politics may have played a role in the hiring of some career Justice employees, in possible violation of federal law.
The controversy has drained morale from U.S. attorney offices around the country. And now, legal experts and former Justice Department officials say, it is casting a shadow over the integrity of the department and its corps of career prosecutors in court.
There has long been a presumption that, because they represented the Justice Department, prosecutors had no political agenda and their word could be trusted. But some legal experts say the controversy threatens to undermine their credibility.
"It provides defendants an opportunity to make an argument that would not have been made two years ago," said Daniel J. French, a former U.S. attorney in Albany, N.Y. "It has a tremendously corrosive effect."
Defense lawyers in political corruption cases often argue to juries that the prosecution was motivated by politics, especially when the prosecutor happens to be of a different political party than the defendant.
B. Todd Jones, a former U.S. attorney in Minneapolis, said such arguments are now "given credence in the public eye because they are seeing that maybe there were political decisions made. Any defense lawyer worth their salt is going to say this is a political prosecution that shouldn't have been brought."
The controversy may also be feeding anti-government feelings that many jurors bring to cases, even when defense lawyers do not overtly try to exploit the situation.
"It has become part of the background that jurors have in their minds when they deliberate," said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), a former assistant U.S. attorney. "Jurors will think, 'Gee, is there a political motivation for this? Is it being brought because the U.S. attorney wants to curry favor with the attorney general and keep his job?' Corruption cases are tough enough to prosecute without having to defend yourself against attack."
As a prosecutor, the most valuable asset that you have in the courtroom and out of it is your reputation for honesty and integrity, and for upholding the rule of law in a fair and just manner. The Bush Administration tossed that aside for each and every decent attorney working in USAtty offices across this nation in a bid to gain some temporary political advantage is a craven example of how low a regard the Bushies have for any sort of standard of ethics. And how much emphasis they placed on loyalty to Bush Administration aims above all else, including to the nation as a whole.
Everything is subordinate to Rove's math. Everything.
The Bush Administration has sullied the Department of Justice, and saddled USAttys nationwide with Rovian baggage every single time they step in a courtroom. They have treated the rule of law as if it were a "do you want fries with that" level of opt-in, and diverted every resource at their disposal toward the Rule of Karl.
The fallout from this will be long and arduous, and it must all be laid at the feet of the people who initiated the damage: the Bush Administration. Bring on the sunshine. The only way out of this mess is to know how deeply these festering roots go into the heart of our nation's justice system -- and every other administrative agency across the board. The time for accountability is now.
(Duck and cover ipod shot via striatic. Great photo!)
UPDATE: On the RNC e-mail deletions: Rep. Waxman has more. As does the Speaker's blog. As does the WaPo.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Hi gang!
Dos o tres para Hillary, and 250,000 for Karl…
le troisieme de nouvaux
I just loved this picture. :)
Does it seem that AGAG assumes that (because of the failure of no-confidence motion, presumably) he has won? Appointing a last interim (A)USA before the lid slammed shut was nothing but a flying fickle finger to Congress, and this latest move to set up a formal mechanism for political review of USA’s activities are not the acts of a person walking on eggs: he feels that he has gotten through it all, free and clear, doesn’t he?
Has he?
More evidence of KKKarl’s involvement: PIC
Bushco stains everything it touches.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 4
Is that a “duck and cover” reference?
Tommy Yum at 8 — Yes, it is. *g*
We may have to re-create the entire DOJ from
scrap, uh, from scratch! I remember asking here several weeks ago where the ramifications might lead to from Goodling and others’ influence on the hiring of far less qualified applicants over many who were more qualified. The overwhelming nature of the Bush Junta’s crimes appears more extensive and daunting every hour.Christy, Before the crowd arrives, could I ask you whether West Virginia would be a good place to move to? Couple in their 60s, a scientist-turned-writer and a healer, not much cash, require organic food, etc.
It is a great pic, Christy. Cute and appropriate.
It bothers me that Karl and his minions are so deluded that instead of coming to the realization that they are in the wrong and outside of the law, that they will simply say, oops, we need to double-down since we apparently didn’t execute properly during the last push.
Abu G.’s slated meetings with all the USA’s in what appears to be an effort to encourage their enhanced politicization (threaten them?) seems to be a double-down, for example, as does the new push against voter fraud in NC.
Ed*ard Teller @ 10
IIRC it was Comey who testified there may be no way to put that Genie back into the bottle.
Wups, here’s the crowd!
Christy, you’re on fire this morning!
Thank you!
I guess I’m grateful that, as everywhere else, Rove’s putsch has been sufficiently clumsy that the boomerangs they unleashed all seem to be heading back at them, and their slimy tactics are becoming increasingly well known, thanks to oversight hearings.
Bob in HI
I suppose my question to the tech people among us is: The RNC may have pushed the button but they didn’t own (apparently) the servers or control the backup systems so aren’t those emails still out there? Also didn’t Leahy recently say that supposedly destroyed emails had in fact been found?
behindthefall at 11 — Well, I think so. Cost of living here is not horribly high, so that’s a plus on a fixed income. The organic food issue is a little more difficult, but if you were looking for more of that, the Morgantown area near the University has several health food stores within walking distance of downtown. And they have a lovely community theater group and lots of concerts and such througout the year as well. We love it — but then, being a WV girl born and raised, I’m a bit biased. *g* Here’s a good website to start for information on the state.
With regard to the RNC email accounts:
1) I still think it is highly likely that most of those emails were downloaded to the computer hard drives. There are any number of ways to “hide” them so that they do not turn up in a search. For instance, Karl Rove may have had a special PST archive file set up on his computer in which he stored “important” messages, or things that he might want to retain.
2) IANAL, but the pattern of so many WH people using RNC accounts to communicate means that someone had to set them up, and maintain them. In other words, there had to be a concerted effort (read “conspiracy”) to circumvent the Records Laws and keep the communications off of the ‘official’ channels.
3) Why does the RNC permeate the White House? Who in the RNC was giving instructions to the White House? This really blurs the line between US government, elected by the people, and the RNC, which benefits a select few.
With regard to the DoJ, every USA with any integrity should resign in protest. That sounds radical, but if I were in one of those positions, and someone like Alberto Gonzales was going to ruin my career, I would want to make some serious noise about it in PUBLIC!
Christy, if you’ll allow me to play devils advocate for a moment, so what? I mean, really? For 7 years I have been waiting for the Scandal du Jour to finally result in some actual, tangible consequenses. I am seriously beginning to question whether this, or any scandal will really resonate enough for anything to happen. And this isn’t one of those ’screw it, everything will be bad forever’ comments. I’m being serious. Is there anything about this, the email deletions, or any other current scandal that will result in actual, you know, action, and if so, why this time and not the others? Thanks.
Is deleting that evidence a crime? At what point does it become a crime?
Hugh at 16 — They should be retreivable, at least in part, from the servers. And it is my understanding that Leahy has made requests to that effect. We shall see and, in the meantime, some folks at the RNC ought to feel some public heat.
So did y’all read Ralston’s deposition? I did, and from what I could tell, she told us a whole lotta nothing. Just confirmed what we already knew. Plead the 5th a lot. Although her attorney said it wasn’t really pleading the 5th, what with her being there voluntarily and all, and even if she was pleading the 5th, it wasn’t cuz she did anything wrong or illegal. It’s just that
“she doesn’t have sufficient comfort that testimony provided in this setting on those subjects will not have some tendency to inculpate her, at least in the eyes of someone who is inclined to be distrustful or to put the worst possible construction on events.”
No wonder these things take so freaking long.
From reading Ralston’s deposition, it sounds like Rove always has 2 computers (an official and a political), but Ralston also refers to the times when Rove has gotten a “new” computers and new blackberrys, so that makes me wonder how many “political” computers he’s had while at the WH!! She said that Fitz’s people took his “computer” and his blackberry. Also, she refers to Rove.com. That is the first I’ve heard of that.
Christy AT 17: THANKS for responding!
I just got back from a trip to a country suffering under a similar regime, Poland. They elected a bunch of nitwitted, nationalist, xenophobic hysterics who have set about brazenly attacking the independent judiciary and making state tv an arm of the ruling coalition. The parallels were eerie.
While I was there I saw a clip of Bush (slouching impertinently), drinking beer with Angela Merkel. It’s funny the things American television won’t show you.
I assume Bush can’t claim Executive Privilege for RNC emails so then when are the Democrats going to start issuing subpoenas. I really want to know if Pumpkin head, Bobo,Broder, Novack and 60 grit got messages or had there own accounts. The Republicans have been issuing talking points that all sound the same I bet they coordinated their message with the MSM through these accounts. Plus with anything GIVEN to reporters Bush cannot claim they were giving him advice so no privilege. Sure it might not be a crime but it would hurt their creditabilty as “independent reporters”. Taking down the talking heads would hurt the Republicans a lot before the election.
I’m with TimE. I’ve seen lots of outrage. Very little in the way of action or results.
From the House Oversight Committee Interim Report:
Bold in original.
Ralston’s attorney in the deposition said she has a lot more substantially material information to tell, but only with appropriate immunity.
TimE at 19 — You mean, like the American public voting the GOP out of control of both houses of Congress back in November? Like that sort of action? Or Libby being convicted of multiple felonies, along with David Safavian, Jack Abramoff, Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham and lots of others currently under federal and state corruption investigation? Or that the public currently gives Bush a 29 percent approval rating for performance and falling? Because to me, that all shows a LOT of movement in terms of public political sentiment, their willingness to take that to the ballot box for some big change, and momentum to push that to even bigger political change in the future — along with some very high profile legal convictions.
and still we have nothing from one of the fired USA’s about illegal activity that they blew the whistle on during their tenure, right?
NONE. that means these wonderful folks were playing right along. one goes to work for the company they are investigating? What kind of character does she have?
one is mad cause the dissed him and said bad thing. All this while Nero fiddles. it is disgusting how few of the GOP have actually come out and exposed the crimes they know of.
Have I missed any examples of splendid behavior here?
Good late morning from L.A. So glad you are featuring a link to the LA Times article, CHS. When I went in to work this morning several people were talking about it- dead tree copy has it as the page 1 co-lead headliner.
I notice the online article doesn’t have the eyebrow quote from dead tree’s version, p. 10:
“It has become part of the background that jurors have in their minds when they deliberate. Jurors will think,”Gee, is there a political motivation for this?”- Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank)
Redd: I agree completely. But I am curious. If Gonzales’ actions (including lying to Congressional committees on numerous occasions) are not grevious enough for impeachment proceedings against him, what would get this jerk (Abu) impeached short of committing murder or rape? The whole legacy of our country is being decimated by these creatures in the executive branch, but the ball-less Dems are acting as though this politics as usual instead of displaying a sense of outrage or urgency. Why is that?
LS @ 23
He’s also gotten a new Blackberry once or twice when he’s “lost” one. Um, “lost?” Where are the lost one(s) now and who’s reading it?
LS @ 23
This Rove.com? *g*
JR @ 27
or are we getting closer, step by step…
Biodun @ 34
Ewwwww :C
sonate at 32 — To bring impeachment proceedings, the Dems in the Senate have to be able to count on several GOP votes to push it through. They do not have them at this point. With every drip, drip, drip of bad acts from the DOJ that is brought out into the open, there is no telling which one is the straw that breaks the partisan back on that. But you will no doubt recall the vote on no confidence? If they didn’t have the votes for that, they don’t have the votes for impeachment. And you just don’t make a move like that without having your ducks firmly in a row — look how asinine the GOP looked doing that with the Clinton impeachment mess without doing their homework ahead of time.
Did Bush have an account was he personally involved in this crime? Is that why the White House is moving so slow and lying about this issue are they trying to protect the boss? Considering how Bush reclassified his Dad’s Presidential records he can’t claim ignorace of the Presidential Records act. Is this impeachable, it certainly is an easy issue for voters to understand and the lying about the records has to be obstruction of justice. We need to get these people under Oath!
LS @ 23
At this point isn’t Rove’s mere presence in the White House a violation of the Hatch Act?
Helen @ 34
And he still has his security clearance. Go figure.
oldtree — there’s a limit to how much a U.S. Attorney can disclose about an on-going investigation. I sense a reply from Christy on this one.
Iglesias took advantage of a smear to do something about this situation, may have been waiting for this in order to make it public in the media since doing anything else might have been futile under what many white hat DOJ folks believe to be an excessively politicized system. At least one of the USA’s made a complaint about inappropriate contact with the OPR (was it OIG? correct me if I’m wrong). Bu until there was a Democratically-controlled Congress, there would have been no teeth to do anything else.
And these Republicans appointed under a Republican administration still have to be able to find jobs at some time in the future; they may realize all too well that their careers are hosed if they are not pointedly subpoenaed to talk. What Democrat will feel comfortable in hiring them, after all?
Christy, good points all (except I think the 2006 elections were mostly about Iraq and Katrina, but that is neither here nor there). The only other comment I would make is that none of the things you mention get at the heart of, as I see it, the problem, which is the way the Bush political team completely subsumed the policy team. This gave us such gems as the elimination of habeus, illegal wiretaps, cherrypicked intel, the attorneys scandal, etc. Things which will years and years to undo.
So I completely agree with everything you said, especially the part about the creation of an environment where real change is more likely. I am a pragmatist, after all. I just should have made myself more clear that I was specifically referring to the ‘big picture’ stuff.
Breaking News! In a “remarkable” article David Broder has discovered the Bushies manipulate and exploit corporate journalists to create their Bushie reality. Broder has also discovered the Bush Crime Family uses secrecy to hide their crimes.
Even more remarkably, Broder has discovered Bushies are a bad bet. Incredibly, Democrats were not criticized in Broder’s article.
Marie Roget @ 32
Oops, Schiff quote made it into the body of the article online & in yr. post. Shouldn’t have just skimmed it…
ReddHedd @ circa 38:
Thanks for responding. I would just add that impeachment would be useful from an investigatory perspective in that there can be NO claim of executive privilege on subponead information. I’m afraid that Shrub will succeed in “running out the clock” before investigations can be completed.
And Rove almost exclusively used his political accounts….and handled lots of classified information…some of which was faxed to him in the “situation room”…Ralston pretty much says that Rove was responsible for the State of the Union speech content (all speeches including the one with the 16 words)…and that he spoke “often” with Libby regarding the Plame/Wilson subject.
Rove is a threat to national security.
Pass the brain bleach stat!
Frank33 @ 44
The man is prescient!
egregious @ 41
Y’all caught that too huh? I bet there are all sorts of foreign intel orgs would love to find a KKKarl Blackberry and put their IT staffs to work on it…
i’m confused. didn’t leahey waxman et al. mirror the hard drives of the servers and the local desktop or laptop computers? or did they merely request it? i thought i remembered that a outside technical forensic company had been selected to do the analysis.
but, i don’t seen (in the summary - i haven’t read the full report) any mention this.
did i dream it?
The Republican effort to subpoena Plame, faces obstacles that are likely insurmountable. A majority of members of the committee, which is controlled by the Democratic Party since January, must vote to authorize and issue the subpoena.
If we have to we take out Rove, the GOP press, and who ever else we can first then we go after all the Republican Politicans who I’m sure knew about these emails and probably had recieved messages from Rove and said NOTHING. I think their guilty of obstructing justice. Plus whatever crimes they may have talked about in the emails. Then all the Senate has to do is lose a few Republican members in the scandal and we can hold an impeachment vote.
I’m building a new main float for our canoe, rowboat, sailboat and kayaks. It is made out of treated wood, with the styrofoam floatation enclosed in fiberglass, all of which is my own design/construction. I’m hoping to finish it in two or three more days. I’ll bet that by the time I finish putting in the 500 or so screws, nails, bolts and fasteners to hold it together, at least 500 new crimes committed by the B**sh** Junta will have been uncovered.
Flash, flash, flash
Dateline: Washington DC
Date: September 17, 2009
The Washington Post reported today that
Robert Luakin has finally found Karl Rove’s
e-mails. “They are quite damamging,” Luskin reported but somehow I made a fucking dumb
move and did not save them to my hard drive.
I got a virus and they were gone. I’m really
fucking sorry.”
Rove, now the Chief of Staff for Bush in Albania, said that he would appear next week
at his sixth Grand Jury appearance to explain
what the fuck happened.”
More later
Christy Hardin Smith @ 21
Christy,
Alfred Kelgarries covered this on a comment in last night’s thread by Siun on Iraq. It is his comment #68. If he is correct in his suppositions, a whole lot of the info is already in Leahy and company’s hands.
tbsa @ 52
Their desire of these REPUBLICANS to subpoena an ex-COVERT CIA counter-proliferation Patriot, whose name was outed by members of the REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION, for something so trivial as to whether or not she said, send my husband, or I’ll ask my husband; only goes to show how the CONSPIRACY to retaliate against the Wilsons persists to this day and has spread to Congress.
In Slate, Dahlia Lithwick has some advice for Harriet Miers and Sara Taylor on steps they might take for their congressional testimonies:
EPUd but funny enough to repeat.
from the Ralston deposition (Berenson is her atty).
a Okay. We have a list of about 37 names here I am
22 goìng to go through. For each of these ìndividuals also, if
23 you could teLl us what you know about the position they held
24 at the White House.
25 l4r. Berenson. 0y vey.
Everything is subjugated to Rove’s math.
We are already seeing defendants claim that they are being prosecuted for politically motivated reasons. Did you forget the right wing noise machine attack on the prosecution of Irv “Scooter” Libby? Nevermind that the prosecutor was a republican appointed by a republican who prosecuted a republican. It’s still a political prosecution, or so they would have you believe.
1973 = 2007.
1974 = 2008.
In Watergate years, our Democrats are just getting things to a roiling boil in time for next year. I think our lions — Leahy, Waxman, Conyers — learned something from Watergate’s timing. Bring it all to a boil when your party wants the White House.
wag
ymmv
We must IMPEACH today.
Everday we get another Alice in Wonderland
explanation for OBSTRUCTION of Justice.
May the Queen save us!
I’m really getting tired of people in the RNC and the WH and the DOJ obstructing justice, but until Gonzo is removed, who is going to do anything about it?
TimE @ 19
I have to say that I wonder the same thing. Every time there’s a new fresh horror, we think “Surely, they’ll have to hold them accountable now!” Yet, it never happens. It seems like Bush could hold up the dripping, severed head of John Conyers and everyone would say, “Well, he hated America - he had it coming to him” or something along those lines.
I honestly don’t know what it would take.
selise @ 51
No. but Karl wishes it was just your dream, because I think it’s his nightmare!
LS @ 29
Since when does everyone demand immunity. Subpoena her and if she won’t talk, prosecute her! It’s time to make an example of these people.
Is anyone mining the DOJ or the WH staff for someone patriotic enough to spill the beans. Good grief, surely there is ONE person with a conscience somewhere that knows the score about what these crooks have done.
Reminder, pups: Bob Woodward’s WaPo online chat starts at 3pm eastern. Questions accepted anytime. I don’t know if he’ll answer Armitage/Plame questions, but it might be worth a try.
It’s the anniversary of his and Bernstein’s original WaPo story.
Vid & blog write up of Adam Schiff, former AUSA, questioning Gonzales on May 10:
Congressman Schiff’s Blog
OT New Froomkin Lede is Abu Ghraib reports.
More advice from Dahlia:
Christy,
Don’t we have enough of the “preponderance of the evidence” to issue Impeach articles?
Do we have to have a video tape of Bush and Rove hijacking the country?
Did anyone see this, it is about the American whistleblower on ammunitions caches in Iraq, who was taken prisoner by the U.S. after telling the FBI about it - Gonzo must have been involved in this:
http://www.alternet.org/story/50191/
Biodun @ 69
Similar to the Time Warp but not as catchy a tune…
sonate @ 46
Sonate, I’ve thought along these lines for a while as well. The other advantage is that it shuts up those in the Senate who complained that the no-confidence vote was meaningless. A conviction vote is certainly not that. This way they need to either vote him up or down and go on record as condoning his activities or not.
The down sides as I see them are:
1) Starting impeachment hearings too early may cause some people to dig in their heals when, if there was more dirt on the table when things started, they might be moved.
2) Gonzo shouldn’t be the target, it should be Shrub and Shooter. let’s get on to the real business.
So I’m not sure where I come down. To some extent I feel like I’m trying to be too subtle. He broke the law and should pay the consequences and if we keep it as simple as that the answer is: Impeach now!
Just wanna note that when the next administration tries to clean out all the civil service appointments that were in fact political, the republicans are going to claim that the administration is playing politics with appointments and stacking the departments with ideologues. As digby pointed out recently:
xargaw @ 67
I’m with you on immunity for these perps. We have to guard against an Oliver-Northesque slipping away from justice.
TeddySanFran @ 62:
Except that in 1974, a Republican President was sworn into the White House.
Sojourner @ 18
And every career appointment made at any time during the Bush presidency should be carefully reviewed. If irregularities are found (e.g., evidence that appointee was not competitively competent), those appointees should be asked to resign. Can congress impeach career employees?
your mistake is imagining that there was EVER any difference between the political and the policy ‘wiings’ of the regime…
there NEVER was…and the political aims were stark: to remove, if possible, but at least to undermine and disable, any and every institution and instrument by which the People could resist their expropriation fom the tools and means of effective self-government. They ALWAYS meant to follow Grover Norquist’s injunction to redue Govt to a size at which it could be drowned in a bathtub–thereby turning effective control over to the CorpoRats…
and you’re dreaming if you think the Dims are gonna–or even wanna-fix it…
.
TimE @ 19
might I suggest you read Susan Ralston’s deposition and think “shadow government?” tipping point is approaching.
How many smoking guns does it take to impeach a
Prez?
TiredFed—
Explain about shadow government please?
Elliott @ 77
But Ralston is a lowling perp. If she’ll cough up the info on the big fish, give her the immunity, and let’s get these guys. She’s no Oliver North.
I’m fed up. Did I ever ask myself what the front runners of my party for the nomination for prez were doing AND saying while all this was going down? I mean this chicanery goes back to Florida 2000. This is not exactly new news.
The only thing in life that saves me is
baseball……
This is a fact:
No administration, no matter the party, has EVER been more ‘transparent’ than the one it replaced. Never happened; nagahapun…
the next administration/regime, no matter the party, will strive mightily to preserve the (self) protections the previous one was successful in imposing, and will seek to impose NEW ones…
the dems will fight to keep raygun’s and b41’s papers confidential because that way they will also keep the Clenis’ papers confidential.
this will be all the more important, and more likely, if Her Royal Clintoris is ‘elected.’
the interests of the “national security state” will require ever more stringent and draconian regulations of the data of which ‘history’ is composed…
.
LS @ 83
LOL:
“I knew Oliver North, Oliver North was a big time crook, and YOU Ms. Ralston are no Oliver North”
We’re here at TBA watching Max Blumenthal’s CPAC adventures with Michelle Malkin.
Too funny.
sonate @ 33
he has to piss off 17 Republicans. then he’s finished. I’m thinking the Dems need to uncover as many instances as possible of Gonzo flipping the entire Senate the bird - like when he appointed that U.S. Attorney days before Bush signed the revision to the Patriot Act. Dems won’t put impeachment on the table until they are sure they have the votes. too bad. the investigation itself would generate more votes. and please, Dems, more depositions (1 hour questioning by each side) and fewer hearings with the asinine 5-minute rule.
Firedog Alfred Kelgaries had a very interesting comment last night… worth mention here, imo.
wgg: rogue scholar @ 86
Are you saying Carter was less transparent than Nixon/Ford? I find that hard to believe.
Bay State Librul @ 82
no smoking gun required…
but ya gotta have a cum-stained dress…
absent that, there’s no case…
.
sonate @ 46
If he runs out the clock, does that mean the investigations are over? If they continue beyond January of 2009, Bush can offer no pardons.
Bush, with Democratic approval, has been packing the Supreme Court and the Federal Courts for over seven years. The deed is done.
OT–
From AP: