[As with all guest chats, please stay on topic -- off-topic discussions should be taken to the prior thread. Also, please be polite, and help me welcome David Iglesias to FDL. -- CHS]
In 1940, Attorney General Robert H. Jackson gave what was to become one of the most famous speeches on the conduct and mindset of a just prosecutor ever given:
The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous….While the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficent forces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, he is one of the worst….
A sensitiveness to fair play and sportsmanship is perhaps the best protection against the abuse of power, and the citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.
Jackson was speaking to a room full of new federal prosecutors, just after the Hatch Act went into effect, preventing them from being involved in political activities. It was a DOJ milestone when a wall between politicization and justice was erected, so that cases were to be decided on merit, the facts, the evidence and the law, and not primarily on building political patronage.
This wall stood fairly sturdily, give or take a few bad actors over the years, until the Bush Administration’s arrogant and deliberate efforts came crashing in on several US Attorneys who were asked to resign for not being political enough in their prosecution choices.
One of those US Attorneys is with us today.
David Iglesias, whose book In Justice lays out the evidence of this attempt to taint the US system of justice. From his early years as the son of missionary parents to a stint as a Navy JAG, a run at public office in New Mexico and a rise to USAtty there, Iglesias built a career on integrity and a professional reputation for honest judgment — which is everything you have as a lawyer — until he ran afoul of the wishes of the state’s GOP establishment and the political machinations of Karl Rove.
Except the story does not end there. In fact, it’s just getting started.
Iglesias and his fellow USAttys decided that, in an administration where political fealty was placed at a premium, they knew where their real loyalty ought to lie: to the American public. And so they spoke up, testified before Congress, and laid a large amount of evidence in front of the court of public opinion.
And, in the end, the finger of guilt pointed all the way to the White House. With resignations of key figures in the scandal ranging from Monica Goodling, Kyle Sampson and Paul McNulty at DOJ all the way to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and Sara Taylor and others connected to Karl Rove, all of whom eventually resigned. But only after the stunning revelations from former DAG James Comey of hospital bedside attempts from the Bush WH to ram through an illegal breach of the 4th amendment and the FISA laws with their NSA domestic spying program.
And, in In Justice, David Iglesias walks us back through the scandal as it unfolded, through testimony of him and his colleagues and the shameful "I don’t recall"-itis of the various DOJ employees and WH minions.
What remains, though, are a host of questions that Iglesias raises in In Justice — which, for those of us who have worked in the justice system, is an especially painful set of questions with no ready answers. And it is those issues I most want to discuss today with our guest, David Iglesias. Because it is clear that he cares very much about the integrity of the justice system, of the Department of Justice, and for the rule of law.
So, here’s a start on questions:
– We know what the fired USAttys refused to do. But how will we ever know what the attorneys who kept their jobs may have done? And I offer the Siegelman prosecution and another one closer to my home – the Craigo prosecution – as potential examples, along with the odd saga of Rachel Paulose in Minnesota, although there are many more that have also raised questions.
– With the recent OIG/OPR report on politicization of hiring for the SLIP and Honors programs, and questions regarding politicized weeding out of potential hires based on political fealty tests – this leaves a huge problem: a lot of these folks were hired for career positions during the last 7 plus years. Are they properly vested civil service employees now? For AUSAs hired and trained under the politicized atmosphere of the last few years, will there be re-training in proper evaluation and prosecutorial standards if they worked in a politicized office? A lot of the AUSAs and folks at DOJ will have learned a false culture in this highly politicized environment — how can you possibly learn who has and who hasn’t without it becoming a witch hunt, which would simply be reverse politicization. How will these folks overcome the taint of having been hired during this period, because a number of them are bound to be even-handed, decent lawyers? This is one huge mess.
– Worse, how does the DOJ even begin to regain any public trust after all of this plus the Yoo and Bybee memoranda, the wholesale gutting of the civil rights division which has been used to support caging and other efforts, such as the Georgia Voter ID law, and large questions of internal standards and checks for civil liberties and anti-politicization monitoring having been wholly disregarded?
– Further, how do we return to a respect for the rule of law in this country rather than a wholesale disregard for it unless a particular provision can be made politically useful?
The administration of justice should never, ever be merely an afterthought on the way to some fleeting political divide and conquer strategy. Justice is an end unto itself, and one that should be valued, highly, in a nation whose foundation rests on the equal application of the rule of law. We forget this at our peril.
I want to personally issue a thank you to David Iglesias for standing up for his nation at a time when such courage was sorely needed. As Dr. King said, there comes a time when silence is betrayal — luckily for all of us, David Iglesias chose to speak up. With that, I welcome David Iglesias and open the floor for your questions and comments.
Related posts:
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Christopher Eisgruber, The Next Justice: Repairing the Supreme Court Appointments Process
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes David Cole, Torture Memos: Rationalizing the Unthinkable
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes David Swanson, Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Thomas Ricks – The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2006-2008
- FDL Book Salon: Dear President Obama With Bruce Kluger And David Tabatsky
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
David, thank you for stopping by the Lake.
Christy, thank you for Hosting this book salon.
Hi, David! Welcome to FDL.
My pleasure, I’ve been looking forward to this discussion. FDL has quite the reputation.
Welcome David — so glad to have you here today. The book was an excellent read, and brought up so much of the same disgust and anguish that so many of us have been feeling about the disrespect for the rule of law and for the traditions of the Department of Justice. Am looking forward to this conversation.
Thank you so much for dropping by to talk about this with all of us.
I’m eager to read your book David. I noticed a few months ago you seemed to indicate you don’t trust Darren White’s role in this whole affair. I know you’re a Republican but would a candidate like White make you support Martin Heinrich for the Albuquerque congressional seat?
You must have been talking with folks in Pat Fitz’ office. *g*
That is an excellent question. How can the next president and Attorney General clean house to rid the DOJ of extremists legally and fairly?
Hi Chrisyy, Hi David, thanks for coming by the Lake.
I’m glad yo spoke up.
And thanks for writing the book.
Welcome David. I live in CO on the NM border (Cortez) and watched in disbelief when Heather Wilson won the 06 elections. I watch in horror at what happened to you and wasn’t surprised to see it relate back to Wilson, she’s bad bad news.
Because I’m involved in NM politics I’ve really felt for you and though I haven’t read your book yet, it’s on it’s way from Amazon.
Welcome to Firedoglake, it’s great to have you here.
Aloha, David! What is your take on Turd blossom’s ‘absolute immunity’ from testifying…?
Welcome David!
Christy: Thank you for your kind comment. My good friend and fellow fired US Attorney John McKay also told me it dregged up lots of disgust when he read it. I think one of my colleagues hasn’t read it yet because of the emotional impact.
Regarding Howie’s question, yes, I do have profound doubts as to Darren White based on his comments about me (after I left office of course). I don’t know enough about Martin Heinrich to really say. I’m staying out of politics and endorsing folks for a very long time.
David, something that I didn’t mention outright in the piece above, but did linkup was a bit that I noticed from your book and from a prior book we had for our book salon — from John Anderson’s Follow the Money. Thought you might find this interesting considering your conversation with the USAtty from San Antonio after you were asked to resign:
This is especially intriguing in light of this from John Anderson’s Follow the Money:
The tidbit in a footnote on page 277: details of Rove’s prior use of a pliant USAtty office in San Antonio for payback against political opponents as a template for the current USAtty scandal and politicization questions embroiling the DOJ. So many of Rove’s actions are repeats of successful smaller oppo actions in his past — what other predictors are we missing?
From whom did Mr. Sutton get that sneak peek?
Mr. Iglesias, a great honor to have you here at FDL.
Second, or is it third this question!
David, Welcome to the Lake. Many of us have been following your story from the time it first was picked up by Josh Marshall at TPM and then quickly became the topic of many many discussions here.
Glad you’re with us.
I truly think that is the most daunting question facing everyone involved in this. How do you (a) decide who has been mis-trained or who is deliberately trying to taint the process for partisan reasons, and (b) how on earth would you fairly go about sorting that out without risking wholsesale witch hunt mentality and/or discrimination suits out the wazoo for political theater as much as to combat real discrimination — and how on earth would you know what was legitimate, considering the atmosphere inside the Beltway these days?
Christy & Bev – thanks so much!
Welcome Mr. Inglesias, and thank you for visiting with Firedoglake today. We have many folks here (myself included) who have made the issue of the firings at DOJ our own and followed developments very intently. Your courage is appreciated.
Your book is on order, and I look forward to reading it.
The joint OIG and OPR report covering politicization in the SLIP and Honors programs hiring was released recently, and during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary committee this week, Attorney General Mukasey ran like heck from the issue. Paraphrasing, he stated that he hadn’t found any politicization at DOJ, and wouldn’t address the contents of the report.
Did you read that report, and do you concur with Attorney General Mukasey?
David
Welcome–and I’ll second what Christy said. I followed the USA firings as closely as almost anyone, and your book was still a very interesting and accessible read.
I’ve got a question specifically about Main DOJ’s press handling of this. You note that the ABQ Journal got leaked news of your “resignation” before you announced it publicly–suggesting someone was forcing your hand. Then there are the leaks–some of them clearly from Main Justice–in the Lam case, which are a subject of Brent Wilkes’ appeal.
You mention Brian Roherkasse, but much of this leaking happened before he was in charge and probably before Public Affairs was brought into the loop formally on this. Who do you think was orchestrating these leaks? Do you think the folks behind the firings were working directly with public affairs, or were they doing the leaking directly. (There’s also a Mike Elston email that seems to suggest he knew of a leak before it came out.)
CTuttle: I’m not at all surprised that Rove didn’t testify. He knows too much information that could get him and others in trouble. The “executive privilege” argument is beyond week. Check out my article in last month’s Slate.com about that. I hope Rove is eventually compelled to at least show up and testify, rather than thumb his nose at the rule of law.
Thank you so much for being here today, David, & for your service to our country, both in the Navy & as USA in New Mexico. I’d like to ask some of the questions I jotted down @ one of your book signings. Here’s one of them-
Now that AG Mukasey has been in office for a while, what is yr. opinion of the job he’s doing? What stands out for you in the way he’s conducting himself as AG, both pro & con?
Well that was a mouthful! All of which I’ve been wondering/worrying about now for years. Would LOVE to hear David answer that, address the issue. Will we ever get our Justice Department back to the quality it was preBu$h?
I have to say, of all of you who were “purged,” McKay really floored me given his reputation in Washington state.
Newtonusr: I disagree with Mukasey. The Honors Program politicization is the tip of the iceberg. When the rest of the OIG/OPR report is made public, I’m afraid the public will be aghast at the depth and breadth of the problem.
Conyers is actually considering, *gasp* ‘Inherent Contempt’…!
I believe that’s what Pelosi said in a news conference lately.
I suspect that the leak was orchestrated by the State GOP or Domenici’s office. They wanted me out and thought if they forced my hand, I’d be too humiliated to speak out. They guessed wrong. They also did not know about the other 6 US Attorneys who got the same call I did on DEC 7.
an honor to have you here Mr Iglesias – my favorite republican
Welcome to the Lake!
Thank you for your service and goodness yes, thank you for your adherence to the rule of law.
One follow-up on this–in the actual, final refusal to show up, Rove/Luskin/Fielding don’t mention Executive Privilege per se, at all. Rather they rely solely on absolute immunity, which in turn relies on the claim that the subject Rove was asked to testify about (Siegelman, primarily) was part of his “official duties.” The White House made that claim without any specific support from DOJ (they relied on an earlier Bradbury opinion pertaining to the USA firing).
It strikes me that this puts the White House in a very dangerous position–basically arguing that they believe it was Rove’s job to funnel oppo research from his cronies in Alabama to DOJ, specifically with the intent to make sure Siegelman wouldn’t run again. Had Rove done it as a private citizen, it’d be dirty, but not illegal. But it seems like Fielding has basically just admitted that they committed Hatch Act violations.
The problem is, what’s the best way to leverage what may have been a sloppy claim from Fielding?
Glad to see you here, Mr. Iglesias. This administration has installed loyal hacks throughout government, driving off conscientious and dedicated public servants. What do you think it will take to restore agency functions and respect for the rule of law for a new administration?
Mr. Iglesias, how exactly do we get back to Mr. Justice Jackson’s ideal of prosecutors who understand the nature of the power they are entrusted, and wield that power with the discretion it merits?
Mr Iglesias, thank you for spending time here at FDL and thank you for standing up for what is right and proper.
I have not had the opportunity to read your book but wonder if you would care to comment about how eight USAs were fired, one or two (such as Mr Fitzgerald) were probably in positions where Rove et al WANTED to fire them but knew it would be even more politically disastrous than what occurred. This still leaves the vast majority of USAs still on the job.
Statistics have shown that Ds have been prosecuted significantly more often than Rs during this admin (even though the number of office holders between the two parties is roughly equal). How do we regain the confidence that ANY prosecutor is operating for anything other than the most base partisan motives?
I’d rate Mukasey as a “C”. He is no Alberto Gonzales. I hear from currently serving US Attorneys that he’s aloof. Probably a good thing for Main Justice to leave US Attorneys alone. Mukasey is a caretaker, nothing more than that. The next US AG will have a lot of re-building to do.
David — one thing that has nagged at me throughout this process, from the time that hints of politicization started peeking out well before you all were asked to resign: where are the principled GOP lawyers and legislators who, in the past anyway, would have stood up loudly and forcefully and put their collective foot down. The sort of backlash that I would have expected on something like this — especially from folk in the Federal Bar Council and elsewhere — has been altogether muted at best. You mention in the book that only 3 GOP Senators showed up to question you and your colleagues when you testified.
These are NOT partisan issues — these are issues that ought to trouble all of us, regardless of who holds the White House. And I do not understand the silence from so many quarters that I would have expected to stand up on your behalf and that of your colleagues who were wronged in this, and against the politicized hiring and so many other issues intertwined in this. Is the fear of retribution from Karl Rove that powerful — or is it something else?
It will take years to rebuild the “reservior of trust” that James Comey so eloquently talked about.
Esay, brudda.
Don’t you think that the Ashcroft/Gonzales/Mukasey DoJ has reached the level where persecution is a more appropriate term than prosecution?
John Mckay was a superstar, one of the best lawyers I have ever known.
So presumably from DOJ to Domenici to local papers? That would make sense in your specific case–thanks. I remember that Alan Weh made some early really damaging (for Rove) comments to the press.
Thanks for visiting today, Mr Iglesias, and thanks to you and your family for your service and the sacrifices entailed in becoming a central part of this sordid tale of injustice. I’m among those who are very concerned about the non-fired USAttorneys — and what they did to keep their jobs. We’ve learned some horrible stories, like the one about the poor woman who let a contract and was imprisoned wrongly for it.
My questions for you are: first, do you think we will ever learn of the extent of the deeds done by the USAttorneys who weren’t fired?
Second, what was the extent and nature of your contact with Karl Rove during your tenure at USAttorney?
Thanks for writing this book and for joining us today.
You and Charleton and McKay at Seattle University was a terrific panel. It really set the issues on the table.
Couldn’t the House add Rove to the pending civil action they have against Miers and Bolten? It’s not too late to amend the complaint is it? I can’t imagine that the House Judiciary won’t hold Rove in contempt of Congress.
Welcome David. Thank you for all you’ve done.
Do you think it will be possible for the justice department to ever really become un-politicized?
I appreciate your appearance here Mr. Iglesias. I can only say that what Mr. Jackson stated in his famous speach has been knocked out of the current DOJ and justice and gov.oversight. In my humble oppinion only impeachment and a complete investigation of DOJ and most other agencies is the only way back.
Rove was doing these dirty tricks, with FBI help while still in Texas, just ask J. Hightower.
This should be item one to all citizens (dem, rep, indi, green, lib) cause if we lose this we are back at the bad old days.
Very sorry to hear Congresswoman Sanchez tell David Shuster yesterday on Verdict that the little Capitol jail may have been redecorated out of existence….
hi betsy, he answered that @ 34.
Welcome David,
Your take on “Special Prosecutor” office.
I have to stand up for the Federal Bar Council. For a group that usually takes a year and half to plan a panel, they did one on the US Attorney firing scandal in less than 2 months. And it rocked.
I’ve never seen the program committee move so fast. What Mary Jo wants, Mary Jo gets, at least from folks in NY. *g*
It took the Association of the Bar of the City of NY more than an additional year before they held their conference on this. Which was also excellent. I met your friend Mr. McKay there. And Sen Whitehouse delivered a VERY impassioned keynote talk about it.
I agree that these are not partisan issues, but were allowed to become that. I’m at least grateful that a few GOP members of Congress spoke out– Coburn, Specter and a few others. I don’t think it was fear of Rove, not sure what is was. Having never worked on the Hill, maybe some of you can comment on this lack of courage.
It’s a different argument, though they may well do so. The pending case is based on a claim of Executive Privilege. This case is based exclusively and solely on that Bradbury memo that cites absolute immunity from testifying.
The memo comes into the Miers’ non-appearance, but at least Bush had invoked EP with her. With Rove, they’re just claiming that, based on memos DOJ wrote on only tangentially related issues last year, he simply doesn’t have to show, even without BUsh invoking EP.
See, I suspect DOJ probably was reluctant to write supporting opinions this time around, so I suspect if DOJ can be pressured to acknowledge that, this case could be pushed in a different manner than the other two.
fyi – Abu’s pick for Ark. USAA replacement and Rove’s favorite oppo weasel: Tim Griffin has joined the McSame Campaign working for Steve Schmidt –
link
I’m sure they could find a suitable utility closet or some such, Teddy!
Orale Homes:
No, the vast majority of prosecutions are righteous. It’s the horrible ones like Georgia Thompson in Wisconsin and Siegleman in Alabama that get the headlines.
yes, well, they can just decorate it back INTO existence, too.
Thanks for your reply. Another one of those questions from the speak & sign I attended for In Justice that I didn’t get time to ask that night-
What are your thoughts on the reality of voter fraud in New Mexico, based on your experience investigating it?
(And…, will you be doing any book events in the Los Angeles area?)
If you mean “comment on this lack of courage” as Democrats, I think I can say uniformly that we are aghast.
I am very proud of Specter. He has taken the rake to them.
That’s true — and that panel was fantastic. I think it is a shame that it did not get more play in the larger media, though — or that some of the folks who spoke up there didn’t take their complaints to a wider audience. But again, that goes back to why folks were not speaking up more forcefully on this — and it’s a question that I have not been able to answer to my own satisfaction. Sadly.
Weh’s comments made me think of Col Jessup’s comments in “A Few Good Men” when he admitted on the stand, “You’re __damned right I ordered the Code Red.” Weh is a retired USMC Colonel. No disrespect intended, I have lots of Marine friends, it was a weird case of life imitating art…
But the problem is that those outrageous political prosecutions taint the righteous ones.
In more ways than one, huh? That’s a great analogy.
Hi Do you think you could want to have Gonzo’s old job in the not to distant future? And what changes would you make to fix the Justice Dept?
friends, we have a certain kind of shorthand that we can read and understand, but our guest may not know what we are talking about half the time. Please be complete with your questions and statements so that a newcomer can understand.
Thank you.
(I have to say this in church all the time too)
This is true but unlikely to happen. So at a time when we and our government are facing the greatest challenges we have ever faced: global warming, peak energy, a tottering financial system, and a legacy of governmental lawlessness, we will do so with a government that is and will remain profoundly damaged.
Mr. Iglesias, if you had the ability to do so, please outline what your plan would be to restore DOJ and to handle the “problem” of the hires that don’t need to be there?
We’ll only find out if the House is successful in getting the documents from the White House. I believe the vast majority of my currently serving USAs were not given an opportunity to compromise themselves. Their support of us has been wonderful.
Re: Rove, met him once at a luncheon in Albuquerque.
Yes, please David. I heard you say you don’t want anything to do with lawyering anymore. That’s sad. Will you rethink that or what are you wanting to do next? You mentioned being in the media. Odd choice for someone wanting to distance themself from corruption!
That was a great forum, I’m glad C-SPAN covered it.
Yes, given time and the proper leadership.
Thanks, I’ll let Bud Cummins know that.
Mr. Inglesias, I have been so looking forward to this book salon. I am about 1/2 way through your book and Christy’s right, it is an easy and accessable read.
My own perceptions are molded through the prism of SDNY. You mention (page 46) that the slot of US Attorney is “part of the spoils”. Years ago, I was having lunch in DC when I was there to be sworn into the Supreme Court and I wound up having lunch with the incomming US Attorney for OK who was in DC for his confirmation hearing.
He said much the same thing. Here in NY, there is normally a lot of attetnion paid to who the new USA might be and a surprising amount of pushback if the short list has people on it who see too political.
At the beginning of GWB’s first term, there was a move to put Gov Pataki’s criminal justoce coordinator ( and personal friend) in the slot. it caused an uproar and Jim Comey ( a total consensus pick) wound up being the nominee just to put out the firestorm.
So, I’m wondering, is it so different in the rest of the country? Is it more about being seen as a good “paty” person? In NY, that was a DIS-qualification.
So, I found what you and that long ago Oklahoma US Attorney had to say, so different form our experience here. Is NY just out of step–in a good way?
Certainly, the game of chicken Sen. Fitzgerald had to play with Denny Hassert to give the NDIL slot to Pat Fitzgerald, would seem to suggest that.
Mr. Iglesias, I am late to this thread. Your courage and — dare I say the “p” word — patriotism are absolutely stunning by contrast to this corrupt administration. Thank you so very much for standing firm and doing your absolute best for us. Thank you. Oh, I already said that.
Oh, and for those trying to remember what Weh, the head of the NM GOP said, here’s what Weh willingly told McClatchy in March of last year:
Weh said this WAY before the really substantive evidence of Rove’s involvement had been released. It was basically Weh waving a flag saying, “You’re damn right we got Iglesias fired.”
Voter fraud, based on the task force I stood up between 2004-2006, is not a major problem in NM. There are isolated cases of it, but none that I could prosecute in federal court.
The President prevented the USA for DC from considering the appropriateness of his invocation of Executive Privilege in the matter of Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers and their failure to testify before the House Judiciary committee. How on earth is this legal?
Point well taken.
You know, I used to do public corruption and fraud against the gov’t cases. The defense always claims that it’s just a witchhunt. That’s SOP.
Actually having bogus public corruption cases happen? It’s such a crippling blow to future efforts to prosecute.
I think I’ve heard Comey deliver variations on the speech about the “resevoir of credibilty”, maybe 1/2 dozen times now. That resevoir is beginning to show bodies of gasping fish.
No thanks on more political jobs. I don’t have the time or space to write the ways DoJ needs to be fixed. I hope the transistion team assigns a large number of lawyers to come up with a solution.
David,
Since you have been around the legal/political world for a while now and seen the best and the worst, who do you think would be able to rise above the fray and be a really excellent AG capable of starting the housecleaning that will need to be done very carefully?
Several names would be excellent if you have thoughts along this line.
I’m taking a break from lawyering but will probably re-engage. I wanted to be an network analyst on federal prosecutions and military cases, but so far, no bites.
Do you really think that “the public will be aghast”? Is your experience that “the public” is even aware of these issues, or is it an impassioned and engaged part of the nation?
Do you not think that when, in a future administration, the dam bursts and information about the abusiveness in hiring practices becomes clear, that this will not be drown out with claims that “this is just partisan politics”?
Here in WV, it’s a mix — the USAttys are almost always folks who are very well connected politically. However, the federal judges here do not put up with politicized actions on their part, and the state bar looks very badly on USAs who cross that line. (See my Craigo link above regarding the SDWV USAtty who was forced out of office for overstepping).
I can’t think of a USAtty here who hasn’t been politically connected and savvy in the last umpteen years, but by and large, they have also been folks with impeccable lawyering credentials and a reputation for integrity. The few times there have been overtly political exceptions, things have gone badly. (Again, see the above link. *g*)
Mr. Iglesias, have you been asked to advise the Obama campaign and Barack Obama himself? Perhaps you can’t or prefer not to respond, but I deeply hope that connection happens.
I’ve said the same thing. I’d like to see Sheldon Whitehouse for AG and see him hire a whole department of attorneys and investigators to straighten things out at the DOJ.
you display too much truthiness, i’m thinkin’.
And Thank You for your service to our country, and for your honesty!
Great question. In retrospect, I think SDNY has the better model. Had I been picked that way instead of having Domenici sponsor me, I doubt he would have called me and tried to lean on me.
Besides CSPAN, it’s also available in formats more easily viewed online (in my opinion) @ the Seattle University School of Law website, as well as @ Washington State Public Television:
http://media.law.seattleu.edu/…..events.htm
http://www.tvw.org/
Mr Iglesias, you are my hero! Thank you.
The Department of Restoration
has a nice ring.
Thank you. For this son of an immigrant from Latin America, I had a very high idea of what DoJ should and should not be. I’m glad I had equally committed colleagues willing to speak out.
You could say that you are willing to read the scripted responses on Fox and probably be hired right away.
I think part of that, is the bar in NY REALLY cares about who sit sin that office. They haven’t all been superstars, but when we’ve had effective USA’s, the quality of life here really improves.
It’s a beautiful analogy. Takes months or years to fill the resevior and seconds to drain it.
I’m sure Toensing and diGenova have that sewn up thank you very much *g*
snark aside – after seeing you so clearly and succinctly lay out what USAA scandal was all about on Bill Maher – you would be WONDERFUL on the play by play
Welcome, Mr. Iglesias. How has the attendance been at your book engagements? Do the people who attend seem to be mostly people like FDL readers who are really up on the particulars or are you having a sense that broader outreach is happening in terms of info?
Are you talking voter fraud (as in someone tries to illegally vote) or election fraud? Re the second, the public reporting in 2004 clearly suggested that Sproul & Associates had engaged in (seemingly) illegal activity in multiple states (with funding from the RNC), with ripping up voter registration ballots registering Democrats and otherwise. Or, the cases across the country of minority districts having flyers go out with false information as part of voter suppression efforts. Could you provide a window on that and/or other cases?
Any constitutional scholars out there know the answer to this question?
Thanks for the links. I missed the panel on tv and really want to watch this.
Here in Minnesota, we endured the reign of Rachel Paulose, and even when she “stepped aside,” there was barely a ripple among the citizenry. People are not paying attention and/or they simply don’t care. A tough environment for radical restoration (I believe the etymology of the word “radical” means returning to roots). Never give up!
Thank you MarieRoget.
:)
As selise noted, Whitehouse read the riot act to Mukasey about how important it was not just to look at matters going forward but those that had happened in the past and continue to influence the present. Whitehouse then went and voted for the FISA Amendments Act which basically precluded this happening in the area of Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program and what actually went on in it.
I have not been asked by any campaign to assist. I’m sitting this election cycle out.
I do wonder, though, how many more claims of “politicization” are going to have to be combatted now and for so long into the future. A defense attorney wouldn’t do their job properly without raising it if there is even a question, but how horrible for every office around the country to have to deal with that when, for a lot of them, this is not a problem of their making — or of their overtly trying to even do. (I know our local USAtty office has stayed true to its mission for the most part that I have heard — and I would have heard griping if not.)
Very welcome, & siri, too. I have a hard time w/CSPAN replays on my machine. Those two sites are much better IMO.
No thank you.
i know, i know. it made me sad on top of sad.
he still rocks when he’s questioning bushies, tho, and his vote alone made me wonder if something wasn’t in the works for FISA when we change administrations.
Thank you, the Maher interview was one of my favorite. Just wish I had more than 6 minutes to talk.
Mr. Iglesias, this is a rare pleasure indeed and I have admired what you have done for our country speaking up and out with your concerns for our once proud system of justice.
Can the resevoir be filled again or will it take another “hatch” like act to guard against the justice dept being dundermined by the next despot to take office.
What cimes do you think a sincere ag would prefer against those who masterminded the fall of our justice dept…namely, I would like to know what you think the proper charges might be against someone like rove and gonzales
From my scandals list:
227. The House and Senate can vote a statutory contempt citation if the conditions of a subpoena are not met. By law, the contempt citation is then referred to the US Attorney for the District of Columbia “whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action.” With regard to citations in response to claims of Executive privilege in the US Attorney firings scandal, unnamed Administration officials have asserted that the Congress has no power to force the Department of Justice through the US Attorney for DC to convene a grand jury and pursue charges of contempt. They are basing this position on an untested May 30, 1984 opinion by then head of the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) Theodore Olson. Olson argued that since the Executive executes the laws in specific cases, it is an infringement of the separation of powers that Congress should substitute its judgment for the Executive’s and direct it to apply a law against any specific individual. He then seeks to marry this concept to the situation of an individual receiving a contempt citation from the Congress in an Executive privilege case. According to Olson, prosecutorial discretion allows the Executive to decline to pursue such a case.
What Olson is really arguing, however, is not separation of powers but that the Executive is an independent power and preeminent.
“The Executive’s exclusive authority to prosecute violations of the law gives rise to the corollary that neither the Judicial nor the Legislative Branches may directly interfere with the prosecutorial discretion of the Executive by directing the Executive Branch to prosecute particular individuals.” p.115
As such, the Executive is unaccountable to anyone in how the laws are executed, except in the broadest terms I suppose of election, funding, and impeachment. Olson’s argument also assumes the duties of US Attorneys are identical with the interests of the Executive, which in practice are those of the sitting President. If this view were to be accepted, US Attorneys would cease to be agents of the law and become agents of a particular President and his/her agenda. In other words, they would become political not legal officers. It was precisely the Administration’s attempts to erase this difference which produced the Attorney firings scandal in the first place.
David
Have you made any public comment about how it felt to see Heather Wilson lose the primary to replace Domenici?
Barack Obama? Ok that was a bit of a joke.
Hello Mr. Iglesias, i am late to the show here. First off, I am in Phoenix and close to paul Chalton’s family. What the two of you, McKay and the others suffered is intolerable. I have a couple of questions:
1) do you still believe in the efficacy of the Bloch investigation and/or the OPR in your case?
2) How would you, given optimal circumstances, like to see any investigation and or prosecution of the USA firings be conducted?
3) From your impression, how deep rooted is the politicization of the DOJ; both at Main and at the various USA offices? What and how long will it take to place back on a stable and even keel?
And when prosecutions do border on the political (e.g., Manny Aragon and the Metro Court Building here in NM) it’s more difficult to establish that it’s not a political persecution.
You deserve a break today! :-)
I’m from WI, so I really appreciate your comment about Georgia Thompson’s prosecution.
Strictly as free marketing advice (probably worth what you pay for it), has your publisher talked about doing online chats such as this one with the big dailies?
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel doesn’t know how to do “chats.” But my guess is that a couple of their reporters would be very interested in more quotes from you about the very courageous statement you just made about Georgia’s prosecution. Getting more free coverage in big dailies might spur sales and that’s something all America needs. Also the Journal Sentinel in Milwaukee is also the NBC affiliate. If their print reporters talk to you, you might be able to leverage that into some local tv and radio coverage. Again, I think that’s the kind of free publicity you need to sell more books. The same template might work in other states impacted by politically motivated dismissals of US attorneys
OT, as you know, the situation is just as bad at the state level. Here in Milwaukee the GOP hack, who runs County Government, lost FIFTY MILLION dollars in a bi-partisan “buyback” from the county pension. It was a way to pay off favors for both parties. The IRS could suspend the pension $1 billion dollar fund’s tax exempt status. The county DA won’t take county government on and the state AG won’t either. $50 million dollars is gone, very serious problems with the IRS, but no one is held accountable.
Living in a small state with a small bar association does have its benefits. *g*
A start would be James Comey or Sheldon Whitehouse.
I have to say, that two of the most dramatic (and stomache churning) pieces of testimony I have ever seen in judicairy committee hearings, were your testimony about the Domenici phone call and Comey’s about the hospital vist.
In both instances, I had that “scalped” feeling. That lightheadedness that is the beginning of the flight or fight response.
One thing I have noticed, is that the further in time you and your fellow firees get form the event, the agrier and more outspoken you seem to be getting. Mr. McKay was a study in contained fury at CitiBar.
Do you want a the next administration to fully investigate, and if a triable cases exists, to prosecute the people responsible for this?
If so, who would be the targets of such an investigation?
More specifically, would you run it at a macro level? Rove, Meiyers, etc. or at a lower level? Brad and Monica and Sarah?
Great questions bmaz! I’d love to know.
Thank you for the information. You are right about US Attorneys being legal officers, not political offices. The Bush folks did not choose to understand that critical distinction.
David Iglesias,
I don’t know whether or not you’ve been following the DOJ/FBI Alaska Leiglative bribery case. Another Alaska lawmaker was arrested yesterday. Sen. Ted Stevens’ house was searched last year, and his son Ben – who used to be President of the Alaska Senate – has been implicated (quite a while back) but not indicted. Have you heard of any evidence of White House meddling in the handling of any aspect of these Alaska cases?
Nothing of substance to offer here, but this is an awesome discussion and thank you David for joining us. Like, thank you on steroids.
Welcome Mr. Iglesias, I got here late so this question may have been asked already…
What do you think of the recently passed FISA legislation and did you ever think that the NSA may have been spying on you?
Let’s see, I don’t think so. The local press didn’t call me. No surprise there. I was glad she got beat, she never fully understood the wrongfulness of her actions.
Reportedly, Schlozman’s testimony has already been referred to a GJ for perjury.
I’d be shocked–based solely on the evidence put out in the HJC report on the firings–if all the DOJ figures avoided perjury charges. There is substantial evidence that they collaborated to invent the “absentee landlord” and the “poor management” allegations about Iglesias to try to draw attention away from what was probably Bush’s personal involvement in ordering Gonzales to fire him. And at least a few of the people involved have changed their testimony enough that it appears they might cooperate.
You know, here’s something that has puzzled me about this — and emptywheel likely remembers the finer points off the top of her head better than I do. But both Kyle Sampson and Tim Griffen had close connections to Sen. Hatch as I recall — and both had a hand in helping slip in the “midnight appointments” clause that allowed for indefinite USAtty appointment without Senate approval into the Patriot Act.
I have yet to get any coherent answers out of anyone on the Hill or elsewhere as to whether or not Orrin Hatch knew or aided in that insertion or not. But I have noticed since that came to light, his relationship with Arlen Specter — at least in public — has been quite a bit more frosty.
You’re very graceful–I would be gloating loudly right about now.
Jonathan Turley says the deal was that Congress would stop using Inherent Contempt if the DoJ would take their contempt citations to a grand jury; this deal retired Inherent Contempt in the 1930s. Now that Mukasey won’t allow his subordinate to take the case on Congress’ behalf, Turley says Inherent Contempt should be back on the table; the deal is off.
That was my impression exactly. Her opponent in 06 didn’t run a strong campaign or she’d have gone down then. it was an extremely close election. Patricia Madrid. She’d have been better, at least not a loyal bushie.
Digg this great Book Salon!
I have doubts as to the efficacy of the OSC investigation as they are being investigated by the FBI (Bloch is).
I support John Mckay’s call for a special counsel to investigate and prosecute all provable cases related to our firings.
Say hello to Pablo Charlton–I had lunch with him last month in Tempe.
Defense counsel have stated that they may want to call me to testify on their behalf in the Aragon case. That would be a mistake as the gov’t would get me to state on cross that the ATTEMPT to get me to rush the indictment failed.
Mr Iglesias, I am late to the book salon, so based on their past record, I will trust in the thoroughness of my fellow FDL bloggers and go read what has been asked so far, knowing that any questions I might have will have already been posted ans answered.
I just wanted to say thank you for having the integrity and courage to stand up to those who would shred our constitution and erode our country’s reputation. It’s been a very dark time for those of us who love our country so much and believe in justice without fear or favor. At times it’s not been easy to keep fighting – but if people like you can stand up to the “Sith Lords”, so can we.
And if you ever run for political office, please let us know – you’d be amazed at the strength and determination of these people. We are family, united by purpose and passion and patriotism. And for those who don’t stand up for the constitution and the rule of law, we are their worst nightmare.
I’m glad she was beaten, too.
I think Udall has a better shot against Pearce than against Wilson.
Here in NY we have recently had massive leaking of investigations done by SDNY which has caused the resignations of both the gov and the President of the State Senate/acting Lt Gov.
We’re on the cusp of a teensy state constitutional crisis as a result.
Yet, no indictments. When I was doing public corruption cases, if a leak like that had happened, I wouldn’t have been fired, I would have been beheaded. (OK, I exaggerate for dramatic effect). And to leak an investigation when you don’t have the good s to prosecute? Up until it happened, I would have sworn on my child’s head that it could not happen here.
Yet, in the once holy SDNY, this is suddenly OK? If it weren’t for the sex scandal diverting everyone’s attention, I think Mike Garcia would have suffered quite a backlash.
I think you’re thinking of Brett Tolman, not Griffin.
Both Tolman and Sampson are LDS and do have ties to Hatch (one of the funniest email releases of the whole document dump was a series where Sampson was trying to convert Debra Yang). I think Tolman, in particular, was made into Specter’s minder when he was allowed to take the Chair of Judiciary, and it was Tolman who snuck in the Patriot provision.
The California Democratic Party justifies its $450,000 contribution to California Senate Majority Leader Donald Perata’s legal defense fund by saying that he’s being persecuted by a BUSH US Attorney (their upper case). I expect we’ll see this paintbrush quite regularly; a defense attorney would be remiss not to mention it.
Hello firepups and Mr. Iglesias.
I’m catching up but wanted to make sure to thank Mr. Iglesias for your extraordinary courage. It’s an honor to have you here. Thank you for standing up strong for Rule of Law.
back to lurking and catching up.
Mr. Igleasias, I think Martin Heinrich’s campaign has plenty of ammo in the blogosphere that could be used against Darren White. Just the last two days DW has had his reputation besmirched by the Lobo coach photo ruckus. Would you object to Heinrich’s campaign lifting your remarks for political purposes?
I join Mckay in his call for a special prosecutor. We are still angry because the problem is not yet fixed and has to be fixed.
One thing that I have noted time and time again, in any testimony given by Bush Administration folks who were involved in politicization of the DOJ or other aspects of the justice system: there seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding or an utter disrespect for the quasi-judicial role that a prosecutor holds while they are in office. Having worked as an assistant prosecutor, I can literally remember sitting in my office at my desk, sifting through a file and trying to determine what charges to file before the grand jury for an indictment, weighing the evidence over and over again — trying my hardest not to overcharge or undercharge. Because you weigh both the victim and the defendant and the evidence and facts and the law, all at once, as you do that.
It is such an incredibly difficult responsibility, and one that has to be taken with enormous care and humility or else it is not done with justice in mind. Even in the cases where I was bring an indictment for a violent crime up to and including murder, even where I knew the defendant to be a danger to my community who deserved and needed to be put away for life — you still have a twinge of guilt at having to do that with a fellow human being.
But I did not get one feeling from any number of people who have testified about what was done to you, David, or the other USattys or to the DOJ or any number of things which have been damaged through all of this — not one iota of that same level of caution or care in their actions. And I find that incredibly chilling…and so very wrong.
I’ve been following the Alaska mess on tmpmuckraker.com. I am not aware of any White House connection with the Stevens matter.
Don’t forget that weird “coaching” conversation between Goodling and Gonzales before her testimony, too. That was such an odd moment from her testimony when she was describing it — and then to juxtapose that against his recollection…
Twice now, during questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee, AG Mukasey said he has no intention of looking back at past actions taken at DOJ, and particularly the memorandums from the OLC. Senator Whitehouse has been dogged on this issue.
Do you see any way of solving the issues at hand without scrutinizing the past record? And is Mukasey simply running out the clock?
I’ve never prosecuted or defended a perjury case. The pundits say it’s hard to prove intent, vice a mistake. Anyone out there ever try a perjury case?
You probably know this, Edward Teller, but AK is one of the few examples where the White House’s refusal to give Senators some input on the choice of prosecutors was probably a good thing. Neither Murkowksi nor Stevens got their choice for USA; had they had influence, that case probably wouldn’t have moved forward.
It was Brett Tolman who slipped in the language and he went on to become USA in Utah, and yes, he was a Hatch protege.
Thank you for your kind words. This is a special country for a lot of reasons, among which is the rule of law.
Tolman! That’s it — I knew you’d remember the name details! Bless you…
Udall will win by at least 5 points.
Mr. Iglesias, I’m off to buy your book. (Full disclosure: No one asked me to say that!) My very best regards and deepest gratitude. I’m really and truly honored to have “chatted” with you today. Thanks so much.
Yep, got the guy acquitted. Probably isn’t the answer everybody wants, but it does comport with your statement.
An excellent companion piece to read w/In Justice- John McKay’s Seattle U Law Review article, Train Wreck At the Justice Dept.- An Eyewitness Account.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa…..id=1028545
Brilliant comment. There’s so much to remember about all of this and this is only ONE SCANDAL.
That was incredible to watch! And though INAL, it was so blatant and obvious what had happened.
Couldn’t a prosecutor go after macro and lessor elements at the same time? I’d want to. Hit everyone everywhere at once.
MarieRoget, you are a plethora of valuable links today.
My tabs are filled with your gems for later perusal.
:)
I’m not part of any campaign this year. You might want to view my Youtube.com comments on Darren White. I call him a “ready fire, aim” kind of sheriff who routinely “shoots from the hip.” Darren complained to the GOP about my lack of voter fraud prosecections, despite the fact that he never saw the FBI reports or analyzed the federal laws related to voter fraud.
Yeah, unfortunately, most of us here are familiar with one particular notoriously successful perjury case. Until the commutation, I mean.
I hear you can only win a perjury case if the administration is democratic. ;) sorry!
No, but I have to say that the opening statemetn of the Libby trial included audio tape of Libby in succesive appearances before the GJ.
The sound of his voice, the decrease in the space between words as his lie got smooother and smoother from one appearance to the next, told the story in a way a transcript never could.
It was startling to hear. And I thought after the opening statement that Libby would be at least convicted on that count.
And I learned something about “best evidence”
Christy: the best advice I got 7 years ago when I prepared to become US Atty was from a federal judge and former US Atty who said “David, you have wield your power like a scapel, not a sledgehammer.”
Ditto what Ms. Smith said!
I should add that Michael O’Neill who is now up for a federal judgeship (but plagued by charges of plagiarism) was Specter’s then Chief of Staff. He was part of this too and if I remember correctly he was foisted on Specter by Hatch as a minder in exchange for keeping his Chairmanship of the SJC.
He’s trying to run the clock out. You have to look back at the record.
Thanks–important point.
Thank you, Barbara. I hope you like it.
You must reading the same polls I am.
Yep. Much harder road to hoe with a cold transcript.
I agree. Mckay lays out a compelling case for a special prosecutor–one that could file obstruction of justice charges against Gonzales.
Yeah, and don’t you just love that while he waits for his confirmation amidst the plagiarism charges, he’s working on a masters in fiction writing?
Mr Iglesias, I’d love to know the answer to a question bmaz put forward @ 107:
3) From your impression, how deep rooted is the politicization of the DOJ; both at Main and at the various USA offices? What and how long will it take to place back on a stable and even keel?
We’ll never know for sure, but you’re probably right on that. Most of the muscle for the investigation – at least the DOJ end – is coming from the Public Integrity Unit in DC. Off to watch Sen. Stevens address a joint session of the Alaska Legislature’s Special Session…
I have seen your Youtube comments on White. I think it came from one of your book signings, so would it be up for grabs?
Your decision to sit out any kind of political campaign or endorsement is just more evidence of your excellent judgment. I bet you have all kinds of suitors wanting to add your integrity to their campaign glow.
I mean, this whole scandal was about mixing politics into justice in the worst way, wasn’t it? JM2c.
Thatsurely brims with bitter irony…!
Mr. Iglesias, thank you so much for your time here with us today. We all stood with you throughout your nightmare, and we will be watching you and what you choose to do.
We will be in support and cheering you along all the way.
I hope and pray your family is well and has stood up through all of this horrific travesty.
And try as you may to go on Bill Maher again. You presented exceedingly well in that format.
Thank you so much again!
I remain a huge fan of you.
David, I want to thank you so much for coming by to speak with all of us today. This has been a fantastic discussion — I know we’ve all gotten a lot out of it. Please, feel free to come back any time. As you are aware, we talk about legal issues quite a bit.
This has been such a great Book Salon…
Thanks for the link.
One of my great fears, is that the next president will adopt the Gerald Ford attitude that we “have to put this behind us”
I don’t think the rule of law can been credibly restored as long as incoming presidents refuse to allow examination of transgressions by prior administrations.
Criminal statues have their own Statutes of Limiations. There should not be a special S of L for high Administration officials.
And I agree with you about needing a Special Prosecutor. Who would you like to see for that? And what do you think should be the genisi of that office? Appointed by judges? Appointed directly by Congress–if so, does a particular committee pick the prosecutor.
How do you see this working in practice? Nuts and bolts?
My belief is that is was deeply rooted at Main Justice, however, most of the politcal appointees have left, so only time will tell if they left any Trojan horses or time bombs around. I think the USAO’s across the country have been left largely intact– you could point to Rachel Palouse in MN, but she left. As did Griffin in Arkansas. Ditto for Scholzmann in the WDMO. I theorize that the plan was to use the Patriot Act to get young neocons into our positions and let them do their work in the remaining 2 years they thought they had. The scandal blocked that attempt.
my favorite so far, evah!
but i say that every time.
heh
I never really realized how small the beltway business community was until I started hanging out at the Lake. Really, someone should start a Fantasy Baseball type website on who is on whose team, who got traded, etc. Build your own Fantasy Political Team, etc. I get dibs on David Iglesias for Special Prosecutor.
I don’t own it, you’ll have to get permission from the owners of the post.
Thanks, I need a long break from politics.
As a minimum we need a truth and reconciliation commission.
Truly, what we need are prosecutions of the whole leadership gang, but I’m afraid that won’t happen.
David, thank you for stopping by the Lake and spending the afternoon with us. It was a very enjoyable time.
Christy, thank you for Hosting this great book salon.
Everyone, if you haven’t bought a copy of In Justice, there is a link above.
Thank you all.
I appreciate your comments.
The foes would be the K Streeters, eh? ;-)
heh heh. That’s good to know.
Thanks for chatting with us today. I have so much respect for your ethics. We need more of that, please.
My pleasure, thank you for inviting me. Sorry about my spelling–my spell checker doesn’t work too well!
Great discussion. Thank you Mr. Inglesias for coming.
Mahalo for being here David! An illuminating Book Salon!
I’d support Pat Fitzgerald.
we’re used to that at the Lake.
thank you for being who you are and doing what you did. I do hope you have a long and fruitful career ahead of you that will do the country proud.
Yes, thanks again for being here & fielding our questions. As you said in Pigott Auditorium @ Seattle U, this country is a beacon, we’ve got a system of justice here that isn’t broken, it doesn’t need tinkering/fixing, & what was going on @ the highest levels of DOJ was just wrong. Let the USAs do their jobs w/out DC political calculus & interference.
Best to you & your wife & daughters.
De nada. My honor to spend time with you smart folks.
Yeah well if that was a bar to participation, neither I not Looseheadprop would be allowed anywhere near this joint.
I appreciate it, I’ll pass your regards to my family.
Though with the Rezko revelations and Sampson’s admission that he floated Fitz’ name for firing, that probably wouldn’t work…
Though he has proven he can win high profile perjury cases.
Jeebus. See, I couldn’t even spell “nor” correctly.
Was gonna make a crack about the epically bad spelling of the lawyers around these parts (Christy excepted). Glad you did it for me.
Mr Iglesias –
Thanks Again – come back soon !
much better to err in spelling than Justice !
Amen
Heh, Both of ya would be barred for life…! 8-)
Must refrain from making an LHP joke regarding spelling… *whistles*
David, your appearance on The Daily Show was wonderful. And thanks for taking our questions today.
I’ve been following this since TPM started following it. I’m in western WA, John McKay’s region. After reading some of the documents and emails released by DOJ in this investigation, I’m still flabbergasted by the arrogance and callousness of the Bush administration. They really believe they can do anything they want to.
Thanks for a great discussion from the lurker in the corner.
Thank you Mr. Iglesias
and thanks some more, Christy
Thank you so much for coming, David, truly a privilege for us to have you here. Best of luck with your work, and please feel free to come back and talk with us again.
And worth mention is that Firedoglake pups are the QUEENS AND KINGS of reading “typo”!!!
*she stated proudly*
:D
Thanks again, David — this truly was a wonderful discussion. Here’s hoping there are many more like them in and out of the Beltway in the next few months which lead to some very productive and very REAL action.
in case you haven’t seen it – Arianna’s Pigs at the Trough is a nice primer on same
Mr. Iglesias, it would benefit to the country if you were back at the DOJ under an Obama administration or perhaps SCOTUS.
Christy, this was just astounding!
Thank you SO MUCH for this and all you do.
I remain a huge fan of you too.
:)
Could a new prez just fire all of them and then rehire the ones he wants to keep? Wouldn’t that act as a shield against discrimination claims?
Frankly, I’d fire anyone who came from Regent and/or the Federalist Society or was recommended by either of those organizations…
Signing off here in sunny Albuquerque. Thank you for your insight.
Take care and keep caring!
Oh! Thanks…I don’t swim very far away from the Lake unless I have a swimming buddy point the way. I’ll check it out.
The USA’s are political appointments, and are expected to move on. But the career folks, even the Regent grads – touchier call.
But I’d love to see them purged.
Thanks for a great discussion, David. Good luck in your efforts to focus attention on these issues.
Thanks again!! Keep on rockin’ in a free world…
oh yeah!
well that was cool as hell
Thanks David and everyone.
David,
Thank you for appearing on The Daily Show to make the younger generation aware of these issues.
Poor guy.
Funny story, years ago he said he hoped to go his whole career w/o ever having to do a public corruption case. This was after I was lamenting how much you have to deal with sideways collateral attacks.
It seems he did NOT get his wish. So ironic.
Ya’ll did a good job today! I enjoyed lurking and reading.
soooooo ditto!!!!!
just coool as hell, to be sure!
this site rocks, never ceases for an instant to amaze me.
It’s too bad you’re not more connected, LHP :-)
Mr. Iglesias,
Thank you so much. For your service to our country. For standing up and speaking truth to power. For stopping by with us here today.
I understand why you need a break from the law and from government serivce. Take whatever time you need to heal, but not too much time.
The bar needs ethical and impassioned lawyers like you. Came back to the practice as soon as you are able. You elevate the profession by your membership.
A Siegel is upstairs!
What Fraction Of America’s $4+/Gallon Gasoline Is Due To The War In Iraq?
whoohoo! ][ knucklebash for christy and fdl crew. awesome.
Me, just a soccer mom from Lawn Guyland. I have been priviledged to know some truly extraordinary people in my life though. I’m like Zelig.
I second all of that wholeheartedly.
((((Christy and Bev)))) thanks so much !
Seconded.
And a hearty amen to that, LHP.
Got to get gone now. An amazing Book Salon- thanks FDL, Christy et al. for making it possible.
BushCo did us dirt when they let these USAs go. How to refill that reservoir of trust…
Read you all later
Yep.
Time to dust off the old reliable from the GOP:
“You do the crime, you do the time.”
And rub their noses in it.And require that we hold these people ACCOUNTABLE.Iglesias on Bill Maher
Kudos for Christy and Bev. Thank you so much for this truly outstanding Book Salon. We take your hard work for granted, but every once in a while there is something so great it shakes us from complacency and makes us realize, again, this is truly the A Team here.
Seconded
YUP.
Great job Crew. This was a really good Book Salon.
You know, this thread is reminding me of a scene in We are Marshall.
The town is recovering from a devastating disaster, crippling really. The football team is trying to rebuild, replace their players lost in a plane crash. They have no chance of winning, but they play anyway, they carry on. They finally win a game and afterwards no one wants to leave the stadium. They just wnat to be together to remember how it was and how they can get back on their feet.
terrorist fist jab to all involved. super!
Thank you Christy and the whole crew for making this possible. Aside from giving us access to people that can help change the country, I hope it makes those people more aware of FDL and all we can do to help them.
Thanks all. Once again you’ve outdone yourselves.
Betcha David would make one fine live-blogger. Hear tell pay isn’t so good though ;-)
Wow. Missed this earlier:
All I can say is WOW!
Knowing that this post will be read by probably no one, late as it is, just have to add my two cents.
Thank you David Iglesias for you honest answers. All that most of us really want is the truth from our representatives in government. We can only hope/wish that others would follow your example.
David, your visit honors those of us that come here for truth, thank you. And thank you, Christy,so very much.
Sorry I missed the book salon. Thank you David, Christy,and all. I thoroughly enjoyed reading all of the comments tonight.
Thank you, David, for your courage and committment to justice and truth. Like many here, I hope for a return to a less-politicized DOJ that we all can be proud of as citizens of this great country.
I still hope that in the near future that we will get an independent investigation into the firings.
Wow, it took me four hours and Bill Moyers and a hellava rotten hour downtime with my laptop, to read the whole book salon. Wonderful…now I’m an hour late for Late Nite!