NY Times: Evidence of a Rove Scandal

We have been documenting the political and legal consequences of the Rove Republican Racket and today, the gray lady, The New York Times, agreed with our general view on Rove's political firing of nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006, especially the firing in New Mexico.

From today's editorial, appropriately titled, "More Evidence of a Scandal:"

Documents released by Congress, including testimony from Karl Rove, offer powerful new evidence that the Bush administration fired top prosecutors who refused to use their offices to promote the electoral fortunes of Republicans.

Turning law enforcement into a tool of partisan politics is a serious offense, and a Justice Department investigation is under way. Congress must also continue its investigation and call Mr. Rove and others to testify publicly so the American people can hear for themselves how the justice system was hijacked.

The materials released on Tuesday paint an ugly picture of fair-minded prosecutors under siege by the White House for refusing to politicize their offices. And it puts Mr. Rove, former President George W. Bush’s chief political operative, at the center of it.

Some of the most disturbing revelations concern the firing of David Iglesias, the United States Attorney in New Mexico. He was put on a list to be fired shortly after a White House aide complained to Mr. Rove that Mr. Iglesias was not doing enough — including refusing to bring politically useful public corruption cases — to help Heather Wilson, a Republican member of the House of Representatives, fend off a Democratic challenger in the 2006 election.

Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, told investigators that an “agitated” Mr. Rove called her before the election to say that Mr. Iglesias was a serious problem, and he wanted something done. Mr. Iglesias had received high marks from the Justice Department for the quality of his work.

Read the full editorial here.

Rove Deeply Involved in Firings

Karl Rove can't hide anymore. Karl Rove can't spin it away anymore. The truth is out.

We have intensely focused on the follies of the Rove Republican Racket and now the mainstream media is picking up on the political decisions made by the Rove-Bush-Cheney Administration that turned the U.S. Department of Justice into a political wing of the Republican Party.

From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Thousands of pages of internal e-mail and once-secret Congressional testimony showed Tuesday that Karl Rove and other senior aides in the Bush White House played an earlier and more active role than was previously known in the 2006 firings of a number of United States attorneys.

Aides to former President George W. Bush have asserted that the Justice Department took the lead in the dismissals, which set off a political firestorm that lasted months. Mr. Rove played down his role in the firings in a recent interview and in closed testimony last month before Congressional investigators.

But the documents, released by the House Judiciary Committee after a protracted fight over access to White House records and testimony, offer a detailed portrait of a nearly two-year effort, from early 2005 to 2007, by senior White House officials, including Mr. Rove, to dismiss some prosecutors for what appear to be political reasons.

Read the full article here.

Rove Denies Siegelman Role

Breaking News from The Birmingham News...

Karl Rove denies having a role in the political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. Rove arrogantly told congressional investigators that he had "more pressing" matters to attend to.

Here is today's breaking news story:

WASHINGTON -- In an interview with congressional investigators last month, former White House adviser Karl Rove again denied pressing the federal prosecution of former Democratic Gov. Don Siegelman as a way of helping to elect current Republican Gov. Bob Riley, according to a transcript released today by the House
Judiciary Committee.

"I had a lot more pressing things on my platter than the Alabama governor's race, and, as a result, a lot more significant things to worry about than the Don Siegelman case," Rove said under questioning by a committee attorney. Although Rove did not testify under oath, it is a crime to lie to Congress.

The deposition took place July 30 as part of the committee's probe into whether that top members of the Bush administration improperly sought to politicize the Justice Department. Siegelman, who served as governor from 1999 to 2003, is free on bond as he battles to overturn his 2006 conviction on federal corruption charges. While no conclusive evidence has so far emerged to support Siegelman's charge that he was the victim of political prosecution, a bi-partisan group of 75 former state attorneys general asked the Justice Department in April to look into the matter. Siegelman defense attorney Vince Kilborn of Mobile could not immediately reached for comment this afternoon on Rove's testimony.

Rising from Political Death

When the Rove Republican Racket fired nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006, they turned the U.S. Department of Justice into a political arm of the Republican Party.

Now, Scott Horton of Harper's Magazine takes a look at some U.S. Attorneys that were to be fired but were saved all because of politics, not prosecutorial skills.

A number of U.S. attorneys were scheduled to be axed, but survived when the White House intervened. How did these U.S. attorneys keep their jobs? One of these “Lazarus candidates” was the U.S. attorney in Jackson, Mississippi, Dunnica Ott Lampton.[pictured left]...Lampton was handling one case that was a matter of intense concern to Republican Party leaders in Mississippi as well as to Karl Rove in the White House: the Minor prosecution. That prosecution was used heavily by the Republicans in their efforts to portray their Democratic opponents as “corrupt.” [It] formed the core of a Republican advertising campaign, coordinated perfectly with Lampton’s prosecution efforts. It sent a message to campaign contributors in Mississippi that they donated to the Democrats at their great peril. The coffers of the state Democratic Party quickly went dry, helping to ensure a series of Republican election triumphs. But Lampton’s efforts failed in the courtroom. The trial resulted in the outright acquittal of one defendant and a hung jury on the balance. That was in August 2005, as Lampton’s name appeared on the list of U.S. attorneys to be fired. In December 2005, however, he secured a new indictment of Minor and the judges. A few weeks later, Lampton’s name was removed from the firing list. The convictions of Paul Minor and his codefendants are now on appeal, with a ruling past due. The appeals court judges hearing the case have requested an almost unprecedented second round of post-argument briefing–pressing the Justice Department to explain its decision to reindict following the initial acquittal and hung jury. They are focused on just the act that may have saved Lampton’s career as a U.S. attorney, and they are suggesting that it looks improper.

Read the full article here.

Absolute Shame in Wisconsin

Although our blog focuses on the prosecutorial misconduct and political chaos created by the Rove Republican Racket, we wanted to share a story of absolute shame.

This is what politics creates in our legal system when the objective is to indict, hide some evidence, and ask real questions later. Many U.S. Attorneys during the Rove-Bush-Cheney era have engaged in the "indict and plea out" strategy as well.

From Wisconsin as published in the North Country Gazette:

A Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge dismissed rape and murder charges against Ralph Armstrong on Friday based on the misconduct of a Dane County prosecutor who concealed evidence of Armstrong’s innocence. Armstrong was convicted in 1981 of the rape and murder of fellow University of Wisconsin-Madison student Charise Kamps. He has always maintained his innocence. Armstrong’s conviction was overturned by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2005 after DNA testing on hair and semen excluded Armstrong as the perpetrator. Prosecutors sought to retry Armstrong, and he has been in custody awaiting retrial for four years. At a hearing in April, a woman testified that she called Assistant District Attorney John Norsetter in 1995 to report that Armstrong’s brother, Stephen, confessed to the crime. Stephen Armstrong was visiting his brother at the University when the crime occurred and was interviewed by police as a possible suspect immediately after the crime. Even though Armstrong’s case was on appeal when Norsetter learned of the confession in 1995, he never told defense attorneys about the phone call and never pursued the lead. Stephen Armstrong has since died.

John Norsetter should be held accountable. Read the full story here.

Revenge in Nevada

Karl Rove spearheaded the firing of nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006 for pure political purposes. Last Friday, one of those former U.S. Attorneys had the sweetest revenge against the Rove Republican Racket: he was renominated for the same post.

From The Washington Post:

President Obama on Friday nominated Daniel G. Bogden, whose firing as a federal prosecutor by the Bush administration is under congressional investigation for its potentially partisan motivation, to return to his former job nearly three years after his dismissal. Bogden's nomination as Nevada U.S. attorney marks a step toward reversing what many Democrats consider the previous administration's illegal firing of nine federal prosecutors in 2006. Congress began investigating the dismissals the next year, and this week Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, concluded two days of closed-door testimony before the House Judiciary Committee about the firings.

Read the full article here.

Pied Piper Plays Eaton's Tune

Previously, we've written about that former DA from Mississippi named Ed Peters, whom we call the Pied Piper.

Looks like he's caused another mess.

Now everyone is asking, "Will the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Mississippi do the right thing and criminally prosecute the high-paid executives of Eaton Aerospace?

It seem that Eaton used the Pied Piper to influence a court decision. From yesterday's Clarion Ledger:

[Eaton] the aerospace company alleges former engineers stole trade secrets for military contracts and gave them to their new employer, Frisby Aerospace of North Carolina. Eaton is seeking $350 million in a civil suit. "Ed Peters is expected to testify that he was brought into the case by Eaton, not as counsel of record, but as somebody who could influence DeLaughter," [U.S. Attorneys] said in a document .... Attorneys for Frisby -now known as Triumph Actuation Systems - maintain rulings from DeLaughter began going in Eaton's favor after Peters became one of Eaton's attorneys. Eaton officials called the document reckless. "There are a lot of false statements in here," said Don McGrath, senior vice president of communications for Eaton, said of the document. "In no way did we ask Ed Peters to imply or ask or insinuate that he would do anything improper in trying to influence Judge DeLaughter or any other judge." The prosecutors allege that DeLaughter went against Dunbar's recommendation to sanction Eaton for failing to disclose its use of a paid whistle-blower in the case. "Peters is expected to testify that he recommended to Judge DeLaughter that the court remove Jack Dunbar and find another special master. Ed Peters even took it upon himself to call another attorney to inquire about his availability for appointment as a special master in the case but called back to ask that his name not be mentioned." According to prosecutors, Dunbar didn't hear back from DeLaughter on his recommended sanctions and was removed from the case.... "In short, once Eaton attorneys found themselves in trouble, they brought in Ed Peters into the case to influence DeLaughter," prosecutors wrote. Asked why Eaton decided to hire Peters, a longtime prosecutor, McGrath replied, "There are few Mississippi trial lawyers that have as much experience as Ed Peters."

Experience or influence peddling? McGrath is full of beans.