The Bush Regime Attempts to Ensure a Loyal
“Justice” System
By Kenneth J. Theisen, 3/7/07
Fact: On December 7, 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice headed by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales dismissed U.S. Attorneys across the country. WHY?
The reasons for
their dismissals keep changing as the Justice Department tries to justify its
actions. Justice Department spokespeople
initially claimed that there were no political reasons involved in the firings
of several attorneys. But then it came
to light that the U.S. Attorney that replaced the fired one in Arkansas was Tim Griffin. Mr. Griffin’s chief qualification was that he
was a former aide to Bush’s chief political advisor, Karl Rove. He did “opposition research” for the
Republican National Committee and Mr. Rove, which means he dug up dirt on White
House opponents.
Others of those
fired also seem to have a “tinge of politics” involved in their firings. U.S. Attorney Carol Lam of San Diego had been
the prosecutor of Republican Representative Randy “Duke” Cunningham who got
caught taking large bribes to “help out constituents” in the fleecing of the
taxpayers. Duke’s conviction helped put
the unethical label on Republicans seeking re-election in the 2006
Congressional election. At the time of
the firings, at least five of the prosecutors were conducting public corruption
investigations. Of course the regime
denies any connection between the firings and the investigations.
But another former
U.S. Attorney, David Iglesias of New
Mexico, testified before the Senate Judiciary
Committee on March 6th that he was dismissed after he received a
call from Senator Pete Domenici. The
Senator called to ask him if he intended to bring corruption charges against
local democrats before the upcoming election. At the time there was a local tight
race between Republican Rep. Heather Wilson and Democrat Patricia Madrid. Rep. Wilson also contacted Iglesias about the
investigation. Corruption was one of the
chief issues in that race and an indictment of the local Democrats could have
impacted the race in Wilson’s
favor. Mr. Iglesias told the Senator he
did not think charges would be brought before the election. Although Wilson won the election by fewer than 900
votes, five weeks later Iglesias was out of a job. As a side note, any communication by member of
Congress with a federal prosecutor regarding an ongoing criminal investigation
is a violation of Congressional ethics rules.
This week the House
also held hearings. The fired U.S.
Attorney for Washington State, John McKay, told those at the hearing that he
received a call from an aide to Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Washington about the 2004 Washington gubernatorial
election which was in dispute at the time.
McKay said, the aide “tried to advance the conversation and I cut him
off.” The Republicans were contesting
the election and making allegations of fraud.
Given that the “no
politics” lie did not seem to be working, the Justice Department then claimed
that the dismissals were for “performance related reasons.” But this lie was almost immediately exposed
due to the fact that all of those dismissed had received positive reviews from
the Justice Department as recently as March 2006. And the former prosecutors were annoyed that
they were now being smeared in the media by the administration. So they have begun to talk to the media and
now are testifying before the Senate and House as well.
Bud Cummins, the
prosecutor replaced by Rove’s former aide talked to the Washington Post about
his firing. After an article quoted him,
he received a call from Michael Elston, chief of staff to Deputy Attorney
General Paul McNulty. He provided an
email summary of the call to the Senate Judiciary Committee: “The essence of (Elston’s) message was that they feel like
they are taking unnecessary flak to avoid trashing each of us specifically or
further, but if they feel like any of us intend to continue to offer quotes to
the press, or organize behind the scenes congressional pressure, then they
would feel forced to somehow pull their gloves off and offer public criticism
to defend their actions more fully.” Keep your mouth shut or we will smear you
further would be a better way to put it.
Now the
administration has a third reason for the dismissals. According to Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse, “At the end of the
day, this was a decision to pick the prosecutors we felt would most effectively
carry out the department’s policies and priorities in the last two years.” The administration is now saying that the
firings were business as usual. White
House spokeswoman Dana Perino stated, “If any agency wants to make a
change regarding a presidential appointee, they run that change by the White
House counsel’s office. That is standard operating procedure, and that is what
happened here. The White House did not object to the Justice Department
decision.”
According to the
Washington Post, administration officials admitted that the prosecutors were
first identified by the Justice Department’s senior leadership shortly before
the November elections. The list was
based on complaints from Congressional members, law enforcement officials and
career Justice Department lawyers, according to the administration. But according to the Post, administration
officials also admitted that the firings were based primarily on the Bush administration’s
displeasure with the prosecutors’ policy decisions and revealed the White
House’s role in the matter.
Why should we care
about a few U.S.
prosecutors being fired? To begin with,
these firings send a powerful message to all the other U.S. Attorneys across
the country. Toe the Bush regime line,
or look for another job. And these
firings are “business as usual” for the regime.
The Bush regime has done everything possible to control the justice
system in this country. It has tried to
pack the courts with reactionaries such as Roberts and Alito. It has tried to intimidate other judges with
warnings from the Attorney General not to “interfere” in national security
matters. It has consistently restricted
or eliminated the rights of defendants, especially those accused of being
“enemy combatants.” It has managed to
pass legislation such as the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act to
make our courts nothing more than kangaroo proceedings.
U.S. Attorneys are
very powerful. They can choose to
investigate or not investigate; to prosecute or not prosecute. If used as a
political tool, they can be used to persecute as well. They are responsible for all federal laws
including immigration laws, public corruption laws, federal election laws, and
“anti-terror laws.” As the Bush regime
continues to move toward more openly fascist rule, it is necessary for the
regime to make sure these attorneys are loyal to the regime. Firing seven attorneys can help ensure that
loyalty. But this “business and usual”
must be exposed and challenged. Loyalty
to the regime is not in the interests of the vast majority of people.