Showing posts with label Arlen Specter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arlen Specter. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Lil' Alberto Is In Dire Need of....

...a neurologist and/or a good lawyer, because he either has Alzheimer's Disease or he is a criminal.

Either way, he must not remain in office.

His performance today at a hearing on the Hill leaves no doubt that he had been and is involved in the continuing crimes of obstruction of justice, abuse of power and perjury before congress. These are crimes against our constitution and against the American people.

Let the record show that the government of the USA continues to be run by criminals who have nothing but contempt for the majority of the Americans people.

Their interest is and always has been the amassing of unconstitutionally broad powers for the executive, while treating Congress as if they, and the decent press and news media, are simply obstacles to their agendas, to be removed at any cost.

When this White House, or any White House, shows nothing but contempt for our elected officials in congress, who are charged with oversight of the executive, and plays silly games with what honest news media we still have and who are charged with informing the American people, that White House is showing it's contempt for us.

Leahy, Specter Lay Into Gonzales
By Paul Kiel
TPM Muckraker

Tuesday 24 July 2007

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Ranking Member Arlen Specter (R-PA) failed to disguise their contempt for Alberto Gonzales in their opening statements. Leahy, after running down the laundry list of Gonzales' failures and instances of questionable testimony, said that the administration's stance on their surveillance programs was "just trust us." Well, "I don't trust you," said Leahy.

Specter was no more sparing in his criticism. Pointing out that the Justice Department suffered from a "lack of credibility, candidly, your credibility," Specter went on a tear of his own ("the list goes on and on"). On Gonzales' infamous visit to John Ashcroft's hospital bed in order to get the ill attorney general to sign off on the president's surveillance program, Specter said "It's just decimating, Mr. attorney general, to your judgment and your credibility."

Below is Leahy's opening statement as prepared.

From Leahy's written opening statement:

Three months ago, when Attorney General Gonzales last appeared before this Committee, I said that the Department of Justice was experiencing a crisis of leadership perhaps unrivaled during its history. Unfortunately, that crisis has not abated. Until there is independence, transparency and accountability, it will continue. The Attorney General has lost the confidence of the Congress and the American people. Through oversight we hope to restore balance and accountability to the Executive Branch. The Department of Justice must be restored to be worthy of its name. It should not be reduced to another political arm of the White House. The trust and confidence of the American people in federal law enforcement must be restored. With the Department shrouded in scandal, the Deputy Attorney General has announced his resignation. The nominee to become Associate Attorney General requested that his nomination be withdrawn rather than testify under oath at a confirmation hearing. The Attorney General's chief of staff, the Deputy Attorney General's chief of staff, the Department's White House liaison and the White House Political Director have all resigned, as have others. I would joke that the last one out the door should turn out the lights, but the Department of Justice is too important for that - we need to shine more light there, not less. The investigation into the firing for partisan purposes of United States Attorneys, who had been appointed by this President, along with an ever-growing series of controversies and scandals have revealed an Administration driven by a vision of an all-powerful Executive over our constitutional system of checks and balances, that values loyalty over judgment, secrecy over openness, and ideology over competence. The accumulated and essentially uncontroverted evidence is that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine United States Attorneys last year. Testimony and documents show that the list was compiled based on input from the highest political ranks in the White House, that senior officials were apparently focused on the political impact of federal prosecutions, on whether federal prosecutors were doing enough to bring partisan voter fraud and corruption cases, and that the reasons given for these firings were contrived as part of a cover up. What the White House stonewalling is preventing is conclusive evidence of who made the decisions to fire these federal prosecutors. We know from the testimony that it was not the President. Everyone who has testified has said that he was not involved. None of the senior officials at the Department of Justice could testify how people were added to the list or the real reasons that people were included among the federal prosecutors to be replaced. Indeed, the evidence we have been able to collect points to Karl Rove and the political operatives at the White House. The stonewalling by the White House raises the question: What is it that the White House is so desperate to hide? The White House has asserted blanket claims of executive privilege, despite officials' contentions that the President was not involved. They refuse to provide a factual basis for their blanket claims, have instructed former White House officials not to testify about what they know, and then instructed Harriet Miers to refuse even to appear as required by a House Judiciary Committee subpoena. Now, anonymous officials are claiming that the statutory mechanism to test White House assertions of Executive privilege no longer governs. In essence this White House asserts that its claim of privilege is the final word, that Congress may not review it, and that no court can review it. Here, again, this White House claims to be above the law. My oath, unlike those who have apparently sworn their allegiance to this President, is to the United States Constitution. I believe in checks and balances and in the rule of law. Despite the stonewalling and obstruction, we have learned that Todd Graves, U.S. Attorney in the Western District of Missouri was fired after he expressed reservations about a lawsuit that would have stripped many African-American voters from the rolls in Missouri. When the Attorney General replaced Mr. Graves with Bradley Schlozman, the person pushing the lawsuit, that case was filed and ultimately thrown out of court. Once in place in Missouri though, Mr. Schlozman also brought indictments on the eve of a closely contested election, despite the Justice Department policy not to do so. This is what happens when a responsible prosecutor is replaced by a "loyal Bushie" for partisan, political purposes. Mr. Schlozman also bragged about hiring ideological soulmates. Monica Goodling likewise admitted "crossing the line" when she used a political litmus test for career prosecutors and immigration judges. Rather than keep federal law enforcement above politics, this Administration is more intent on placing its actions above the law. The Attorney General admitted recently in a video for Justice employees that injecting politics into the Department's hiring is unacceptable. But is he committed to corrective action and routing out the partisanship in federal law enforcement? His lack of independence and tendency to act as if he were the President's lawyer rather than the Attorney General of the United States makes that doubtful. From the infamous torture memo, to Mr. Gonzales' attempt to prevail on a hospitalized Attorney General Ashcroft to certify an illegal eavesdropping program, to the recent opinion seeking to justify Harriet Miers' contemptuous refusal to appear before the House Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department has been reduced to the role of enabler for this Administration. What we need instead is genuine accountability and real independence. We learned earlier this year of systematic misuse and abuse of National Security Letters, a powerful tool for the Government to obtain personal information without the approval of a court or prosecutor. The Attorney General has said he had no inkling of these or other problems with vastly expanded investigative powers. Now we know otherwise. Recent documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act lawsuits and reported in The Washington Post indicate that the Attorney General was receiving reports in 2005 and 2006 of violations in connection with the PATRIOT Act and abuses of National Security Letters. Yet, when the Attorney General testified under oath before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in April 2005, he said that "[t]he track record established over the past three years has demonstrated the effectiveness of the safeguards of civil liberties put in place when the Act was passed." Earlier this month, in responses to written questions I sent to the Attorney General about when he first learned of problems with National Security Letters, he once again failed to mention these reports of problems. Only with the openness and honesty that brings true accountability will the Department begin to move forward and correct the problems of the last few years. Instead, we have leadership at the Department of Justice whose expressions of concern and admissions that mistakes were made only follow public revelations and amount to regrets that their excesses were uncovered. In the wake of growing reports of abuses of National Security Letters, the Attorney General announced a new internal program. This supposed self-examination, with no involvement by the courts, no report to Congress, and no other outside check, essentially translates to "trust us." With a history of civil liberties abuses and cover-ups, this Administration has squandered our trust. Earlier internal reviews, like the Intelligence Oversight Board and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board have been ineffective and inactive, failing to take action on the violations reported to them. Only with a real check from outside of the Executive branch can we have any confidence that abuses will be curbed and balance restored. A tragic dimension of the ongoing crisis of leadership at the Justice Department is the undermining of good people and the crucial work that it does. Thousands of honest, hard-working prosecutors, agents, and other civil servants labor every day to detect and prevent crime, uncover corruption, promote equality and justice, and keep us safe from terrorism. Sadly, prosecutions will now be questioned as politically-motivated and evidence will be suspected of having been obtained in violation of laws and civil liberties. Once the government shows a disregard for the independence of the justice system and the rule of law, it is very hard to restore the people's faith. This Committee will do its best to try to restore independence, accountability, and commitment to the rule of law to the operations of the Justice Department.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. The Lantern has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is The Lantern endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

....And The Truth Shall Set Us Free


Saturday, May 26, 2007

Leahy, Specter Ask Luskin For Rover Emails

A big waste of paper........

Leahy, Specter To Rove’s Lawyer: Turn Over The ‘Lost’ RNC Emails

Senate Judiciary Committee heads Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) have written Karl Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, asking him to turn over emails from Rove’s RNC account related to the U.S. Attorney scandal.

“White House officials have claimed many of these Rove e-mails were ‘lost,’” the senators say, “although some of Rove’s e-mails were reportedly shared with the Department of Justice as part of its probe into the Valerie Plame case.”

Earlier this month, the Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Alberto Gonzales to turn over these Rove emails. The Justice Department responded that it had “retained only the e-mails related to the Plame investigation and returned the electronic media containing the rest of Rove’s e-mails” to Luskin.

Now Leahy and Specter want Luskin to come clean. They ask, “Do you retain possession of this electronic media and will you provide the Committee with Mr. Rove’s emails related to our investigation voluntarily?” You can take a guess at the answer.

Read the full letter from Leahy and Specter, along with their press release:

WASHINGTON (Friday, May 25) — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Ranking Member Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) sent the following letter to Karl Rove’s attorney seeking access to e-mails related to the panel’s ongoing investigation into the firings of U.S. Attorneys and politicization within the Department of Justice.

Rove, a senior political advisor to President Bush, and the White House political operation — which Rove heads — have been linked to the project that resulted in the unprecedented firings of several well-performing federal prosecutors, according to information gathered by the Committee through documents, interviews and testimony. Several of the dismissed prosecutors have testified under oath and said in public that they were unaware of performance problems and believe political influence was a factor in their firings.

White House officials have claimed many of these Rove e-mails were “lost,” although some of Rove’s e-mails were reportedly shared with the Department of Justice as part of its probe into the Valerie Plame case. The Committee issued a subpoena to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales earlier this month compelling the Department of Justice to provide all Rove e-mails it had in its possession related to the Judiciary Committee’s investigation into the fired prosecutors. The Department responded that it retained only the e-mails related to the Plame investigation and returned the electronic media containing the rest of Rove’s e-mails to Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin.
+++
May 24, 2007
Robert D. Luskin
Patton Boggs LLP
2550 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037

Dear Mr. Luskin:

The White House has confirmed that an unknown number of e-mails, including those of your client, Karl Rove, from both White House accounts and those sent or received using political Republican National Committee accounts, have not been archived. You stated publicly that Mr. Rove’s emails were turned over to U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as part of the investigation into the leak of the identity of a covert CIA officer by officials in the Administration that led to the conviction of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.

The Department’s response to the Committee, however, suggests that these emails were not in fact turned over permanently to Mr. Fitzgerald. According to the Department, Mr. Fitzgerald only obtained access to the “electronic media” containing these emails to do a search for documents related to the Plame investigation and then he returned this electronic media to you in a sealed condition.

Do you retain possession of this electronic media and will you provide the Committee with Mr. Rove’s emails related to our investigation voluntarily?

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. The Lantern has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is The Lantern endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

....And The Truth Shall Set Us