One of the biggest, and most disconcerting, angles to the U.S. Attorney purge scandal was the efforts of Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) and his leaning on David Iglesias.
Yesterday, the Senate Ethics Committee admonished the senator, sort of, for his inexcusable conduct.
The Senate Ethics Committee admonished Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, on Thursday for creating an “appearance of impropriety” by telephoning the top federal prosecutor in New Mexico at home shortly before the 2006 midterm elections to ask whether an indictment was imminent in a politically sensitive case.
The committee also said, however, that it found no “substantial evidence” that Mr. Domenici “attempted to improperly influence an ongoing investigation.”
The prosecutor, David C. Iglesias, was one of eight United States attorneys who were dismissed by the Bush administration in December 2006 in what Congressional Democrats say was a politically motivated purge.
Mr. Domenici has acknowledged contacting former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to request the dismissal of Mr. Iglesias. The senator has also apologized for telephoning Mr. Iglesias at home to inquire about a public corruption case, saying that he regretted the call but also that he never pressured or threatened Mr. Iglesias or asked him to take any action. […]
In a letter of “qualified admonition,” the Ethics Committee said Mr. Domenici “created an appearance of impropriety that reflected unfavorably upon the Senate” when he telephoned Mr. Iglesias to ask if there would be an indictment in the corruption case before the November 2006 elections.
My suspicion is that the Ethics Committee went easy on Domenici because he’s retiring. He’s old (76) and suffering from a neurological disorder, and senators probably didn’t want his career to end on a scandalous, humiliating note. I get that.
But a “qualified admonition,” under the circumstances, is not only absurd, it establishes a dangerous precedent about what kind of behavior the Senate will tolerate from one of its own.
This may sound hyperbolic, but Domenici’s resignation in disgrace was not at all out of the question here. He leaned on a federal prosecutor about a pending case, then tried to get him fired, and then lied about it. This isn’t the kind of minor controversy that warrants a slap on the wrist; this was a borderline felony that should have led Domenici out of Congress altogether.
The estimable Paul Kiel had this primer last fall.
[I]n October of 2006, Domenici called U.S. Attorney for New Mexico David Iglesias to ask about whether an indictment against a prominent state Democrat on public corruption charges was forthcoming before the election. When Iglesias said no, “the line went dead.”
After ducking questions about the first reports of the call this February, then saying “I have no idea what he’s talking about,” he finally admitted that he’d made the call and said he regretted it.
And not only did Domenici call to pressure Iglesias, he was also instrumental in his firing, making calls not only to the Justice Department, but also to the White House.
The only explanation offered for those complaints was a vague frustration that Iglesias didn’t file enough cases — a complaint that didn’t hold up to scrutiny…. Domenici’s role was, and remains, the most damning evidence of a political motivation in the firings.
With a “qualified admonition,” Domenici got off very, very lucky.