Rove, Miers Transcripts, E-Mails Released in U.S. Attorney Firing Probe

Via the Washington Post, the House Judiciary Committee has released transcripts of Karl Rove and Harriet Miers' testimony and emails in its investigation into the firing of U.S. Attorneys.

You can access them here. Rep. John Conyers concludes: [More...]

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) today released over 700 pages of on-the-record interview transcripts of Karl Rove and Harriet Miers on the U.S. attorney firings and the Bush administration’s politicization of the Department of Justice. Conyers also released over 5,400 pages of Bush White House and Republican National Committee e-mails on these subjects.

The released materials reveal that White House officials were deeply involved in the U.S. attorney firings and the administration made a concerted effort to hide that fact from the American people. "After all the delay and despite all the obfuscation, lies, and spin," Conyers said, "this basic truth can no longer be denied: Karl Rove and his cohorts at the Bush White House were the driving force behind several of these firings, which were done for improper reasons. Under the Bush regime, honest and well-performing U.S. attorneys were fired for petty patronage, political horsetrading and, in the most egregious case of political abuse of the U.S. attorney corps – that of U.S. Attorney Iglesias – because he refused to use his office to help Republicans win elections. When Mr. Iglesias said his firing was a ‘political fragging,’ he was right."

I haven't read them yet, and I'm off to court for the afternoon, so I'll weigh in later.

< R.I.P. Eunice Shriver | Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    What worries me (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by hgardner on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 02:31:41 PM EST
    What did the US Attorneys who weren't fired do that kept them off the hit list.  Some we know about, but was the FBI bugging of Mayor Street's office in Philly political or legit.  We'll never know.  

    Miers (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 02:52:28 PM EST
    It was a very good thing that Harriet Miers didn't make it to the SC. I just read her transcript and that woman has a really terrible memory. I doubt if she would have been able to find her way to the court house! (Let alone remember the law).

    Having a terrible memory (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by MO Blue on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 03:21:04 PM EST
    was a highly valued job requirement in the Bush administration.

    Absolutely (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 03:42:58 PM EST
    No wonder they left the country in such as mess. There wasn't one in the bunch that could remember doing anything while serving their country!

    She was never a real candidate (none / 0) (#14)
    by denise k on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 11:56:31 PM EST
    They just appointed her to sandbag the congress into approving Roberts without really looking at his far out right wing credentials.  They never really meant to let her get through the process.  Bush/Rove was genius at one thing -- the art of deception and this was just one of his tricks.

    Classic stuff (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Steve M on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 05:59:09 PM EST
    TPM has an image of an email chain from November 2006 where a number of people are informed for the first time about the plan to fire the US Attorneys, including Press Secretary Dana Perino.  The email makes it quite clear that everyone understood the potential for "political upheaval" or "political fallout" from implementing the plan.

    Only 4 minutes after receiving this email, Perino replies with, "Someone get me the oxygen can!!"

    Another recipient responds by identifying "issues in the press for which Dana will need the oxygen can," including the fact that one of the attorneys to be fired had been the Duke Cunningham prosecutor.

    Perino responds: "Give me a double shot -- I can't breathe."

    Pretty funny.

    Now what? (none / 0) (#1)
    by BobTinKY on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 02:27:48 PM EST

    Looking back on this (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 06:30:19 PM EST
    I have to say that I'm not sure I'm convinced that there should be anything illegal about firing U.S. Attorneys for political reasons. The political fallout is the price.

    What if those "political reasons" (none / 0) (#8)
    by shoephone on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 06:40:31 PM EST
    are that the US Atty refused to further investigate or prosecute Democrats for vote fraud after finding no evidence for it?

    That was certainly the case with McKay's ouster. Funny that neither Miers or Rove can remember any of the WA State GOP's panicked letters to DOJ and Rove, screaming for McKay to be canned.


    Slightly different (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 06:43:49 PM EST
    But I would say that what should probably be illegal there is asking the prosecutor to conduct a political prosecution.

    Except Rove was gaming the system (none / 0) (#10)
    by ding7777 on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 07:56:07 PM EST
    because the USA Patriot Act (at that time) allowed
    appointing U.S. Attorneys without Senate approval.

    I've heard that (none / 0) (#11)
    by andgarden on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 08:30:23 PM EST
    But frankly, that sounds to me like an unconstitutional statute.

    Obstruction of justice (none / 0) (#13)
    by denise k on Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 11:53:48 PM EST
    If they were fired to hinder a prosecution -- like Lam -- there is real exposure on this front.  It is a legal matter, not just a political matter and it should be prosecuted as such if it can be proved.