"UNLEASHING THE DOGS OF POLITICS" is a play on the "dogs of war," but, given all the dirty tricks and crimes, RATS might be more appropriate. Either way, their actions speak for themselves. This thread focuses on Chertoff.
======================
In Chertoff's record, shades of politics
His past at Justice may be a hurdle if he's picked to succeed Alberto Gonzales as attorney general.
By David G. Savage and Tom Hamburger, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
September 4, 2007
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-chertoff4sep04,1,4610879.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=trueWASHINGTON -- Shortly after President Bush took office in 2001, Michael Chertoff, then head of the Justice Department's criminal division, met with the conservative group Judicial Watch. It wanted criminal charges brought against Hillary Rodham Clinton in connection with a lavish fundraising event in Los Angeles the year before.
"Chertoff personally assured us he would pursue it," the group's president, Tom Fitton, said recently, recalling the meeting with several top Justice officials. "They said they weren't afraid of taking on the Clintons."
....
In the mid-1990s Chertoff, acting as counsel to an investigative committee led by then-Sen. Alfonse M. D'Amato (R-N.Y.), led an aggressive investigation of then-President Clinton and his wife. He probed the Clintons' Arkansas real estate dealings, Hillary Clinton's Little Rock law firm, and the actions of her staff after the suicide of White House lawyer Vincent Foster.
At Justice, Chertoff set in motion a little-noticed policy change that led to more aggressive prosecutions. Some, like the Rosen case, were dogged by allegations of partisanship.
Rosen, the fundraising director for Hillary Clinton's first Senate campaign, was indicted on suspicion of underreporting donations used to throw an L.A. gala for the Clintons in 2000.
Key to the government's case was a claim by California businessman Peter Paul, who hosted the event, that about $1.1 million had been spent on the program -- not the $400,000 reported to the Federal Election Commission.
But at the time, there was no legal limit on the size of contributions such as donated entertainment .......