Justice Department Subpoenas Its Former Lawyers In Civil Rights Probe

Justice Department Subpoenas Its Former Lawyers In Civil Rights Probe

August 6, 2008 12:27 PM


A federal grand jury has subpoenaed several former senior Justice Department attorneys for an investigation into the politicization of the Department's own Civil Rights Division, according to sources close to the investigation.

The extraordinary step by the Justice Department of subpoenaing attorneys once from within its own ranks was taken because several of them refused to voluntarily give interviews to the Department Inspector General, which has been conducting its own probe of the politicization of the Civil Rights Division, the same sources said.

The grand jury has been investigating allegations that a former senior Bush administration appointee in the Civil Rights Division, Bradley Schlozman, gave false or misleading testimony on a variety of topics to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Sources close to the investigation say that the grand jury is also more broadly examining whether Schlozman and other Department officials violated civil service laws by screening Civil Rights attorneys for political affiliation while hiring them.

Investigators for the Inspector General have also asked whether Schlozman, while an interim U.S. attorney in Missouri, brought certain actions and even a voting fraud indictment for political ends, according to witnesses questioned by the investigators. But it is unclear whether the grand jury is going to hear testimony on that issue as well.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/06/justice-department-subpoe_n_117285.html

they have good reason to distrust the proceedings, and they have apparently 'been deeply trained' that speaking out gets them punished.

Has subpoenaed Rove testified yet? Miers? Seems like ignoring subpoenas is all in vogue these days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Schlozman


Controversies

Georgia Voter I.D. law

In 2005, Georgia passed a controversial voter I.D. law which required that all voters to show photo identification at the polls, and eliminated previously accepted forms of voter identification, including social security cards, birth certificates or utility bills. As required by the Voting Rights Act, "Georgia and other states with a history of voter discrimination" (mostly southern states) are required to show that law changes will not have a discriminatory impact on minority voters, and to get approval by the Department of Justice under 1965 Voting Rights Act<8> All of the staff of the Civil Rights division of DOJ, save one<9>, recommended against the new law's approval, but Schlozman and other political appointees overruled the staff and approved it.<10>

The law was initially held unconstitutional as against the Georgia state constitution, but that ruling was reversed by a unanimous decision of the Georgia Supreme Court. <11><12>. Similarly, in federal court, U.S. District Judge Harold L. Murphy issued an injunction against the law, holding that it was constitutionally suspect but declining to consider whether it offended the Voting Rights Act.<11> Subsequent to the federal court decision, Schlozman wrote an op-ed Atlanta Journal-Constitution supporting the bill<13><14> However, to date, a point critics and the media rarely acknowledge, neither the Georgia State nor Federal District courts have held that the Georgia ID law runs specifically afoul of the Voting Rights Act, the only statutory provision considered by the Schlozman and DOJ in granting approval of the state law.

Texas redistricting

In 2003, Tom DeLay spearheaded an ambitious redisticting plan for the state of Texas. Justice Department lawyers wrote a memo opposing the plan, concluding that the it violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The memo was "unanimously endorsed by six lawyers and two analysts in the department's voting section."<15>. Nevertheless, political appointees overruled them and approved the plan. Schlozman was alleged to have been one of those officials who overruled the plan.<16>. The Supreme Court of the United States, in a complex 100-plus page ruling, overturned part of the plan for failing to protect minority voting rights, but held that other parts of the Texas redistricting plan satisfied the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. <17>.

Lawsuits against Missouri

In 2005, Schlozman and DOJ were pressing for a lawsuit against Missouri accusing the state of failing to make a "reasonable effort" to eliminate ineligible people from voter rolls. The then US Attorney for Missouri, Todd Graves, who Schlozman later succeeded after Graves' forced resignation, refused to sign off on the lawsuit, which was subsequently authorized by Schlozman himself.<18><19> The suit named the newly elected Missouri secretary of state, Democrat Robin Carnahan - the daughter of the late governor Mel Carnahan, and failed Senate candidate Jean Carnahan (who was narrowly defeated by Jim Talent) - as the defendant. <20>

On April 13, 2007 a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, asserting that the Secretary of State couldn't police local registration rolls and noting, further, that the government had produced no evidence of fraud.<20>. The Justice Department has appealed that ruling and the case remains pending.

Dismissal of U.S. Attorneys controversy
Dismissal of U.S. Attorneys Controversy ( v • d • e )
Articles

* Main issues
* Timeline
* Summary of attorneys
* Documents
* Congressional hearings
* List of Dismissed Attorneys
* Complete list of related articles

G.W. Bush Administration Officials Involved

* Fred F. Fielding, White House Counsel
* William K. Kelley, Deputy White House Counsel
* William Moschella, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General
* Brett Tolman, U.S. Attorney, District of Utah, former counsel to Senate Judiciary Committee
* Mary Beth Buchanan, U.S. Attorney, Western District of Pennsylvania, former Director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys from 2004 to 2005

Involved Administration Officials that Resigned

* Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General, former White House Counsel
* Kyle Sampson, Chief of Staff to the Attorney General
* Michael A. Battle, Director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys
* Michael Elston, Chief of Staff to the Deputy Attorney General
* Monica Goodling, Justice Department's liaison to the White House
* William W. Mercer, U.S. Attorney, Acting Associate Attorney General (retains position as U.S. Attorney in Montana)
* Sara Taylor, Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Political Affairs
* Paul McNulty, Deputy Attorney General
* Harriet Miers, former White House Counsel (resigned prior to publicity surrounding the controversy, effective January 31, 2007)
* Karl Rove, Deputy White House Chief of Staff
* Bradley Schlozman, Director Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys; former Acting Assistant Attorney General for, and later Principal Deputy Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division; former interim U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Missouri

U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
110th Congress

* Patrick Leahy, Chair (D)
* Arlen Specter, Ranking member, former Chair (R)
* Chuck Schumer, Chair: Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts (D)

U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary
110th Congress

* John Conyers, Chair (D)
* Lamar Smith, Ranking member (R)
* Linda Sánchez, Chair: Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law (D)

Main article: Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy

The forced resignation of U.S. Attorney Todd Graves and subsequent appointment of Schlozman is part of the Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy, which concerns the replacement of a number of U.S. Attorneys by the George W. Bush administration in its second term.<18> The appointment of Schlozman, and his actions regarding alleged voter fraud and voter registration prosecutions appears to be consistent with a pattern relating voting and elections to the dismissed U.S. Attorneys.<21>

ACORN voter registration prosecutions

In addition to the complaints regarding the lawsuit against the State of Missouri, described above, attention has focused on his lawsuit against several former employees of the activist group ACORN.

In the summer of 2006, ACORN "paid workers $8 an hour to sign up new voters in poor neighborhoods around the country. Later, ACORN's Kansas City chapter discovered that several workers filled out registration forms fraudulently instead of finding real people to sign up. ACORN fired the workers and alerted law enforcement."<22>Just five days before the 2006 election, Schlozman announced the indictments of four of the former ACORN workers, who all ultimately pleaded guilty to the voter registration charges. The election featured an extremely close Senate race between the incumbent Jim Talent and eventual winner Claire McCaskill. Critics, including former U.S. Attorneys Todd Graves<23> and David Iglesias,<24> claimed the indictments before the election violated longstanding Department of Justice policy.

Joseph D. Rich, a 35-year veteran of the Department of Justice, and chief of its voting section from 1999 to 2005, wrote, in a Los Angeles Times op-ed, "Missouri had one of the closest Senate races in the country last November, and a week before the election, Schlozman brought four voter fraud indictments against members of an organization representing poor and minority people. This blatantly contradicted the department's long-standing policy to wait until after an election to bring such indictments because a federal criminal investigation might affect the outcome of the vote. The timing of the Missouri indictments could not have made the administration's aims more transparent."<25>

Schlozman testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 5, 2007. Responding to questions about possible political motivation for pushing forward with prosecution immediately before the 2006 election, Schlozman stated in his testimony ten times that he had been directed by Craig Donsanto, who heads the Justice Department's Elections Crimes Branch, to bring the indictments in advance of the election and testified that he had received specific approval to bring the indictments at any time, regardless of the timing with respect to the election. On June 11, 2007, he sent a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, clarifying his testimony while the record for the hearing remained open. In his letter, he stated that he had not been "directed" to indict for voter fraud, days before the November 2006 election in question, but that Schlozman himself made the decision to indict. Schlozman clarified that his staff had consulted with the Washington DOJ Election Crimes Branch and was advised that the DOJ policies concerning investigations of election crimes were not implicated in the ACORN case where no individual voters were to be interviewed or indicted. In May, 2008, The Kansas City Star obtained through a FOIA request e-mail messages between Schlozman and Donsato discussing the indictments just two days after they were announced, four days before the election, and months before the Judiciary Committee expressed any interest in the matter. Schlozman forwarded Donsanto a Wall Street Journal editorial praising the indictments. Donsanto replied within an hour, stating that it was "nice" that the DOJs work on the indictment was "accurately reflected" by the newspaper. In his reply and on the eve of the election, Donsanto, a career DOJ lawyer who was the author of the DOJ's handbook setting guidelines for the timing of election fraud indictments, did not criticize or otherwise suggest that there was anything improprer concerning the timing of the ACORN prosecution. The DOJ continues to maintain that the timing of Schlozman's indictments did not violate any policy. <26><27> Schlozman also testified that he did not believe this prosecution would have any effect on the election.<28>

<snip>
because several of them refused to voluntarily give interviews to the Department Inspector General,
<snip>

The DOJ has allowed criminals in the WH to simply not show up when Congress called on them, the DOJ said it wouldn't get involved....

Well, that damn boomerang just keeps hitting these jackasses in the teeth now...

So the DOJ has to use suphoena's to get the criminals to testify.....
my bet as soon as the people come into testify they will be singing like canaries.....because after all they were always cowards they were just given a big stick by Gonzalez to do as they pleased.