Fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Somewhere An E-mail Will Lead to Rove

Jason Leopold interviews fired New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias. You can read and watch here.

He fingers Harriet Miers and Karl Rove or others in the West Wing of the White House as being responsible for the firing list.

He advocates James Comey or someone like him to replace Alberto Gonzales.

He explains his role in the Office of Special Counsel investigation. They have subpoena power. He did not approach them, they approached him.

They were mostly interested in Hatch Act issues. He says Pat Rogers pressured him to file "bogus" voter fraud cases.

There's no smoking gun but he believes one exists:


"I believe somewhere on an RNC computer - on some server somewhere - there's an email from Karl Rove stating why we need to be axed."

...."If the Justice Department didn't have anything to do with placing presidential appointees such as me and my colleagues on a list to be terminated, the only other possible place would be the White House... Harriet Miers, Karl Rove or some of their underlings."

He also thinks a perjury or obstruction of justice charge is possible against Paul McNulty or Alberto Gonzales.

< Making the Promise of Title VII Work | Republicans To End The Debacle . . . >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    One hopes that Iglesais's media advisors (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Thu May 31, 2007 at 11:56:00 AM EST
    would suggest that he not conduct interviews with Jason Leopold. . .

    It's a perfectly fine interview (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Thu May 31, 2007 at 12:18:14 PM EST
    There's no need to attack Jason on this interview.  

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Thu May 31, 2007 at 12:48:25 PM EST
    but I've learned to distrust any report from him concerning Karl Rove--and to think carefully about anything else he says.

    Waas (none / 0) (#6)
    by squeaky on Thu May 31, 2007 at 01:33:28 PM EST
    Here is more from Murray Waas on the subject. The two pieces compliment each other nicely. Both bring up the shady ACVR org which mysteriously shut down right before the attorneygate testimony.

    Iglesias mentions Pat Rogers and Wass mentions Mark (Thor) Hearne the founder of American Center for Voting Rights. All roads seem to lead to Rove.


    Fashionable? (none / 0) (#3)
    by squeaky on Thu May 31, 2007 at 12:25:05 PM EST
    Why some continually bash Leopole is beyond me. It must be that it is fashionable for some, like an exclusive club full of those who never make mistakes.

    Credibility shot? Well that is a good starting point to read anyone unless you are a sheep.

    Leopold not the best choice for this (none / 0) (#4)
    by tworivers on Thu May 31, 2007 at 12:45:52 PM EST
    I would not be at all surprised to learn that Rove had a hand in Iglesias's firing.  Given recent revelations about Rove's abiding interest in pursuing cases of so-called "voter fraud", not to mention his protege Griffin's installation as a US Attorney in Arkansas, it makes a great deal of sense.

    That said, Leopold's reportorial track record (particularlly during the latter stages of the Plame investigation) is pretty shaky.  I agree with andgarden that Iglesias ought to think twice about whom he conducts interviews with.

    surprised? (none / 0) (#7)
    by A DC Wonk on Thu May 31, 2007 at 03:29:04 PM EST
    I would not be at all surprised to learn that Rove had a hand in Iglesias's firing

    Except that I would be surprised if we could actually learn it.

    That is to say: I would be surprised if those emails haven't been electronically shredded to smithereens.

    other thoughts (none / 0) (#8)
    by Sumner on Thu May 31, 2007 at 03:45:18 PM EST
    I found the Freudian slip by former US Attorney for New Mexico, David Iglesias, somewhat telling:
    "Carol Lam notified main Justice that she was going to be X-rating..."

    It's not just that one of Carol Lam's most high-profile cases was the San Diego City Hall Corruption Case involving charges of accepting bribes from the owner of Cheetahs strip club, by three San Diego City Councilmembers. (Charles Lewis actually died from illness attributed to stress from the ordeal.)

    It is that there is still the 800-pound-gorilla in the room. Part of the DoJ's strategy for gearing up for the Global War on Sex, involved pouring over a million-and-a-half dollars by DoJ into the San Diego area to use as a launching and staging ground for the GWOS. Much of that DoJ grant money (illegally) helped fund politicking for even more draconian laws against sex, nudity and pornography.

    No one asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales what percentage of his time is and/or has been spent on sex-related issues. But remember that GOP presidential hopeful Senator Sam Brownback, committed Gonazales to agreeing to take on the crusade against pornography during the attorney general's confirmation hearing.

    And from OAG1238-1281.pdf:

    "[I]f they want to go after child pornographers and pedophiles as this president and attorney general have ordered federal prosecutors to do, it's the United States attorneys who have the privilege of making such priorities a reality. That's why it's the best job a lawyer can ever have."

    They gravitate to the alpha male control of sexuality as if they have come to believe that that is the ultimate perquisite of empery, (and it also gives them personal access to such now rarified-art as child pornography.) OH! The POWER!

    We know that when the right-wing demanded that the National Endowment for the Arts stop funding pornography, and that "pornography is perfectly capable of paying for itself, commercially", that that was a ruse. They then subsequently attacked commercial pornography. And when they criminalized child pornography and concocted § 2257, we declared "we have to fight them here, (NEA, child porn, § 2257) or we will have to fight them over all pornography", they seem to have co-opted that mantra and applied it to their traditional war: "We either fight them there, or they will follow us home and we will have to fight them here."

    The sexual zeal and attention to which the attorney general indulges in this sexual totalitarianism is seen in his latest work.

    But do contrast this with the historical indulgences and expressions of power: - that of waging taditional war. That government's main focus, now, (DoJ's at least), is on controlling sexuality, and taking fellow humans captive and imprisoning them (and paradoxically, abusing them), over issues of sexuality, rather than government's traditional expression of hegemony and power by simply indulging in killing other human beings on battlefields, (for whatever reason can be concocted), is a somewhat new paradigm. But in the various hearings re DoJ, the topic of sex has been glaringly missing - participants recently have been avoiding talking about government's intrusion into sexuality, even while there is much evidence that this is where the attorney general may have been spending the most of his time.

    Speaking of Hatch, (although The Hatch Act precedes US Senator Orrin Hatch), Senator Hatch was one of the most extreme crusaders in this morals war. As a senior member of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, Orrin Hatch has  been largely silent on these issues, lately. As these morals war issues appear to be perhaps his most religious passion, and since he has direct access into the White House as well as the Old Executive Office Building, we ask again, what was his role in this mess?

    Even the government's wholesale voyeurism of massive surveillance is largely glossed over. Those testifying, deliberately avoid talking about the methods-and-sources. One is to assume that the US Attorneys are also clued in on the methods-and-sources of the government's voyeurism through mass surveillance.

    Phone companies are now implicated in being agents-for-the-government in spying on the People. Efforts are underway to immunize corporate America from violations of people's privacy. For example, recent disclosures reveal government's abilty to turn cell phones against their owners as secret listening devices. Could having that kind of inside (methods-and-sources) knowledge be one reason that Carol Lam took her new job as "Senior Vice President and Legal Counsel" at Qualcomm, ("Designer and supplier of CDMA chipsets, system software, network base stations, handsets, modems, kid trackers, camera phones...")?

    "Get Rove" (none / 0) (#9)
    by diogenes on Thu May 31, 2007 at 08:17:50 PM EST
    This unhealthy obsession with Rove in the face of more important national issues reminds me of the way that some Republicans went crazy going after Clinton in the 1990's.

    of course (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sailor on Fri Jun 01, 2007 at 11:08:47 AM EST
    non-existent scandals and a bj = perjury, obstruction of justice, vote suppression, illegal war, torture, illegal hiring, secret prisons etc etc etc.

    what's the big deal (none / 0) (#10)
    by peacrevol on Fri Jun 01, 2007 at 09:14:50 AM EST
    So the president doesnt like attorneys. Who does? :P