Comey makes the purge scandal worse for the Bush gang

James Comey was deputy attorney general from 2003 until August 2005, and is one of the few Bush administration officials who still maintains credibility and stature within the political establishment. So when Comey appeared before the House Judiciary Committee to testify on the prosecutor purge scandal, his perspective mattered.

And as the LA Times put it, Comey’s testimony “was among the most devastating for the White House and Justice Department.”

A former high-ranking Justice Department official offered praise Thursday for most of the U.S. attorneys who were fired last year, saying he considered some of them to be among the department’s most able prosecutors.

James B. Comey, who served as deputy attorney general from 2003 until 2005, often contradicted the White House and the Justice Department, which have said the eight U.S. attorneys were fired for performance reasons. […]

Comey, a senior vice president and general counsel at Lockheed Martin Corp., said that he had had “very positive encounters” with the prosecutors and that the official explanations given for the firings were not consistent with his experience — though, he noted, he left about two years ago.

One by one, the U.S. Attorneys who the Justice Department had to fire for “performance reasons” received Comey’s praise. Arizona’s Paul Charlton of Arizona was “one of the best.” He had a “very positive view” of New Mexico’s David Iglesias. Nevada’s Daniel Bogden was as “straight as a Nevada highway and a fired-up guy.” San Diego’s Carol Lam was “a fine U.S. attorney.” When it came to Seattle’s John McKay, Comey said, “I was inspired by him.”

In other words, Alberto Gonzales, the Justice Department, and the White House fired capable U.S. Attorneys who were doing their jobs well — and they still can’t explain why.

“James Comey is a respected prosecutor who served the American people well as a U.S. attorney as well as deputy attorney general,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.). “Today, we further confirmed that the department’s stated reasons for firing the six U.S. attorneys who testified before this committee had little or no basis in fact.”

A few other purge scandal updates to consider….

* Josh Marshall published a fascinating email from a prosecutor from Washington state about the McKay purge.

Apparently during Comey’s testimony today he said that one of the reasons McKay got himself in hot water with the DOJ heavyweights was because he was pushing for additional resources to investigate the murder of Tom Wales, who was an Assistant US Attorney in Seattle. Tom Wales was shot and killed in 2001. What nobody has talked about, and what you may not be aware of, is the fact that Tom Wales was extremely active in attempting to get tighter gun control laws passed here in Washington.

Think about that for a second. A pro-gun control federal prosecutor was shot and killed. John McKay was agitating for more resources to bring his killer to justice. That pissed off DOJ, who apparently thought that McKay should spend his time going after bogus voter fraud prosecutions rather than solve the murder of a guy who was in favor of gun control. If you don’t think the fact that Tom Wales’ political views weren’t taken into consideration by the higher ups at DOJ when they decided to punish McKay for fighting to find his killer, you haven’t been paying attention to the way these guys have operated for the last 6 years. Every single thing they do is about politics, and the political views of those they help or hurt.

The bottom line of this whole McKay firing could be summed up in this way: try to catch killers, you get fired. File BS charges of voter fraud, you keep your job.

* Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty’s week just got worse.

The chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty has told congressional investigators that phone calls he placed to four fired U.S. attorneys — calls that three of the prosecutors say involved threats about testifying before Congress — were made at McNulty’s direction.

Michael Elston, the chief of staff, told congressional investigators in a closed-door session on March 30 that McNulty specifically instructed him to make the phone calls after the Justice Department’s No. 2 official learned that the fired prosecutors might testify before Congress about their dismissals.

* Monica Goodling’s attorney believes the new investigation into his client’s work “smacks of retribution.”

* And Adam Cohen has a good piece in the NYT noting the “timely job offer” extended to former U.S. Attorney Debra Wong Yang of Los Angeles, just as Yang’s corruption investigation into Republican members of Congress was heating up.

I get the sense, based on newspaper story placement and just general buzz, that the purge scandal isn’t quite as “hot” as it was a few weeks ago, when it was all-the-rage. That’s a shame and it’s a mistake for news outlets that are no longer are treating the scandal with the same intensity. Developments, like the ones yesterday, highlight that this scandal keeps getting worse — and remains a buzz-saw for the administration.

There’s a lot of smoke around that Yang story. Sounds like the only way to uncover any flames is to get some people under oath. Miers is one of those people.

  • So what? Gonzalez is still Attorney General, Bu$h and Cheney are still acting with impunity, against the obvious will of the people, and Congress isn’t even considering impeachment. Where does that leave the 70 + % of Americans who want this gang of crooks out of office, investigated, and indicted?

  • Unfortunatley, the USA purge scandal is too complicated to really take serious hold with the general public, who will never fathom exactly who did what, and why (I can’t even remember who all the players are, and I’m a political junkie).

    The legal trouble these criminals face will cause them to lawyer up and hopefully perjure themselves, and that will have to suffice as the baseline story for Joe Public to wrap his head around.

  • Racerx–but it is the job of those investigating this, Leahy, Conyers et al, to simplify it so the public can understand the bottom line. Bottom line is that it is a bunch of young, know-nothing, inexperienced hacks taking jobs away from trained, experienced and apolitical professionals who were good at their jobs, just so that their inexperienced but well-connected friends can have those jobs. Witht the overall purpose to thwart justice and steal elections. I have a feeling that in today’s employment environment even the general public can grasp that. Nobody really knew if the “culture of corruption” meme the Dems pushed last election would take hold, and it appears that it in fact did. This just takes that one step further.

  • WaPo’s Capital Briefing blog has a great piece on Comey’s take compared to earlier DOJ excuses that I would commend to all.

    One quick comparison, I think, encapsulates the BushCo worldview more than any other. Speaking of USA Charlton of Pheonix, Comey said:

    I respected him a great deal and would always listen to what he had to say. … And, as I recall, Mr. Charlton called me [on a death-penalty case] and talked to me and said, ‘I’ve got to get you to take another look at that, let me explain why’, and made a very convincing case. And my recollection is that he turned me around on it.

    DOJ’s William Moschella, slamming on the USA’s in his testimony to Congress and trying to explain why Charlton was fired:

    Furthermore, on the death penalty, we have a process. … Mr. Charlton in a particular case, was told, and was authorized to seek [the death penalty] in a particular case. He chose instead to continue to litigate after that long and exhaustive process.

    Summary: Yeah you busted your ass to get that law degree, but that doesn’t mean you should ever think. We don’t want your opinion. We don’t want your judgment. We sure as hell don’t want you to talk back. Just prosecute who you’re told, hang who you’re told, ignore crimes when you’re told, and don’t ask any questions. We’ve got a hundred unqualified order takers we can replace you with with one call to the Regent University placement office.

    Hey, only the best management philosophy for the Worlds’s Only Remaining Superpower.

  • If you don’t think the fact that Tom Wales’ political views weren’t taken into consideration by the higher ups at DOJ when they decided to punish McKay for fighting to find his killer, you haven’t been paying attention to the way these guys have operated for the last 6 years. Every single thing they do is about politics, and the political views of those they help or hurt.

    A great sentence for all those people who haven’t been taking these Republicans seriously over the past six years and who wanted to believe that problems weren’t problems. It looks like the first clause is missing a word or has one it shouldn’t- maybe someone could contact Marshall about it. It reads that the attorney’s political views weren’t taken into consideration, but apparently the writer was trying to express that they were taken into consideration.

  • Swan is right, either the word “don’t” shouldn’t be there, or the word “weren’t” should be “were”.

    It happens on blogs, even great ones like TPM.

  • Re: comment #7

    Those aren’t Josh Marshall’s words, they’re the words from the e-mail he published.

  • I agree with bubba, but I think the message needs to be simplified even more. The prosecutor purge scandal is all about letting Republicans break laws that other people would be punished for. It’s about stealing your votes, stealing your tax dollars and stealing your government and getting off scott free because laws apply only to regular people but not Republicans. It’s about Republicans screwing this nation with impunity because they bought off the cops.

  • Retribution?, uh yeah, exactly…

    “noun
    1 retribution; the act of correcting for your wrongdoing”

    I guess they don’t teach English at Regents or at least how to use a dictionary. I am sometimes amazed by the stupidity

  • Comments are closed.