Given what we’ve seen over the last year or so, it’s not as if we needed another example of a Bush-appointed U.S. Attorney bringing dubious, politically-motivated charges against a Democratic official before an election. But yesterday, we got one anyway — and it’s a good one.
Richard Thornburgh is a former Republican governor, and was the U.S. Attorney General under H.W. Bush. With that pedigree in mind, his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee yesterday is hard to dismiss as partisan sniping.
Richard L. Thornburgh, attorney general in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, charged Tuesday that political reasons motivated the Justice Department to open corruption investigations against Democrats in Mr. Thornburgh’s home state, Pennsylvania.
In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Mr. Thornburgh became the first former Republican attorney general to join with Democratic lawmakers to suggest that the Justice Department under Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales had singled out Democratic politicians for prosecution.
“The citizens of the United States must have confidence that the department is conducting itself in a fair and impartial manner without actual political influence or the appearance of political influence,” said Mr. Thornburgh, who is now in private practice. He is defending the former elected Democratic coroner of Allegheny County, Pa., against federal corruption charges. “Unfortunately that may no longer be the case.”
Thornburgh noted the story of former Allegheny County Coroner Dr. Cyril Wecht, who was indicted last year on 84 counts of various federal crimes, including theft from an organization that receives federal funds. What, exactly, did Wecht do? Apparently, his transgressions include the improper use of the coroner’s fax machine for private work. (He’s obviously history’s greatest monster.) There’s no evidence “of a bribe or kickback” and no evidence that Wecht traded on a conflict of interest.
At the heart of the controversy is Mary Beth Buchanan, the U.S. Attorney in Pittsburgh, who has long been the subject of questions about partisan prosecutions.
It’s hard to rank the most offensive efforts to politicize the justice system from the loyal Bushies, but Buchanan’s efforts have to be considered among the most blatant.
Mr. Thornburgh noted that Ms. Buchanan had conducted a series of high-profile corruption investigations against Pennsylvania Democrats in the months before the 2006 midterm elections, including the one against the former coroner, Cyril Wecht.
“During this same period, not one Republican officeholder was investigated and/or prosecuted by Ms. Buchanan’s office — not one,” Mr. Thornburgh said, noting that there had been accusations of corruption against two prominent Republican members of Congress from Pennsylvania in that same period. He said that Dr. Wecht, a nationally prominent forensic pathologist, “would qualify as an ideal target for a Republican U.S. attorney trying to curry favor with a department which demonstrated that if you play by its rules, you will advance.”
The House committee also got some helpful big-picture analysis.
Committee members said they have learned of other prosecutions that may have been political and listed several defendants by name. Donald Shields, the University of Missouri professor, testified that the Justice Department prosecuted 5.6 local Democratic officials for every Republican. The odds of that occurring by chance, he found, is less than 1 in 10,000.
“The numbers don’t lie,” Shields told lawmakers. “There is political bias.”
And let’s also not forget our friends in Alabama.
A former lawyer for Don Siegelman (D-AL) told the House Judiciary Committee today that his client’s case took a “180 degree” turn in 2004, after Justice Department officials in Washington told local prosecutors to take another look at the case — from top to bottom.
According to former US attorney for Alabama Doug Jones, in the summer of 2004 prosecutors told him the case was going nowhere. By October 2004 the case against Siegelman had been dismissed. But one month later, in a surprising turn of events, Washington officials told local prosecutors to give it another shot, Jones testified today. By early 2005 it was as if the case was starting from scratch, Jones said, calling it “completely stunning” and a “complete reversal” from what the defense had been told just months before.
Jones is certain, he said, that Washington DOJ officials played an “integral” part in the renewed investigation.
That would include, of course, Karl Rove, who was reportedly pushing for a prosecution in advance of the election.
I ran out of adjectives quite a while ago to describe this lunacy, but that said, I think this scandal will be remembered as the most outrageous part of Bush’s domestic legacy.