Looking past Abu Gonzales' lies

Josh Marshall helps us focus on the key issue:

But, as I've said earlier here at TPM, we should not let the impact of the exposure of the AG's falsehoods and attempted coverups to deflect our attention from what these facts mean. A wealth of circumstantial evidence points to the conclusion that Carol Lam was fired because her corruption investigation endangered Republican members of Congress and key administration officials. The DOJ and White House has sought to refute these claims with the suggestion that she was dismissed because of weak immigration enforcement. The fact that no one at the Department ever raised the issue with Lam points strongly to the conclusion that the 'immigration enforcement' line was developed as a cover to fire Lam for other reasons -- namely to disrupt her investigation.

Indeed, the fact that Gonzales felt the need to fib on this point testifies to how central such a fact would be to making his story credible.

This is the central issue in the Lam firing. It's central to the corruption Alberto Gonzales has brought to the Department of Justice.

Right, Boss! I'm your friend, right? Anything you say, Boss! Torture? You got it! Unitary executive? Yup! Signing statements? Sure! Iraq war? Legal! What else you want, Boss? All lawyers to be loyal Bushies? No problem! Just don't let me swing for it.....

Update: Josh Marshall:

In almost every case, what we're talking about here is Gonzales's willingness to take orders from the White House -- most importantly from Karl Rove and President Bush -- on firing US Attorneys for corrupt purposes and using the Justice Department to suppress Democratic turnout in swing states. Mr. Gonzales is a secondary issue. The real players are in the White House.

Was Carol Lam dumped

Because her investigations were leading straight to the White House?

It's probably hard to say. Almost every corruption scandal nowadays leads to the Bush Administration...

Aren't you glad Harriet Miers

Didn't get to the Supreme Court?

Harriet Miers is nothing if not loyal to her bestest buddy Bush: (my bold)

Sampson sent an e-mail to Miers in March 2005 that ranked all 93 U.S. attorneys. Strong performers "exhibited loyalty" to the administration; low performers were "weak U.S. attorneys who have been ineffectual managers and prosecutors, chafed against Administration initiatives, etc." A third group merited no opinion.

At least a dozen prosecutors were on a "target list" to be fired at one time or another, the e-mails show.

Only three of those eventually fired were given low rankings: Margaret Chiara in Grand Rapids, Mich.; Bud Cummins in Little Rock; and Carol S. Lam in San Diego. Two were given strong evaluations: David C. Iglesias in Albuquerque, who has alleged political interference from GOP lawmakers, and Kevin V. Ryan in San Francisco, whose firing has generated few complaints because of widespread management and morale problems in his office.

Update: TPM Muckraker has the timeline.

Update: Res Ipsa Loquitur at Rising Hegemon notes:

... in December 2005, Specter's chief counsel "slipped a provision into the Patriot Act reauthorization bill that made it possible to replace U.S. Attorneys permanently without Senate confirmation."

Am I supposed to think that Specter didn't know what was going on? That his chief counsel, who, I assume, he supervises, just happened to make it easier for the administration to can U.S. Attorneys the administration thought unfriendly to their great and glorious Republican revolution? Was Specter negligent? Is he stupid -- or does he merely think I am stupid?

The Attorney General is not the only one with some explaining to do.

Senate Committee looking into the purging of the prosecutors

Even if they have to supoena the prosecutors themselves:

The committee has scheduled a hearing on the U.S attorney firings for 10 AM Tuesday; it's unclear, however, whether the four U.S. attorneys already subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee to testify Tuesday afternoon would accept the Senate committee's request. If they did not, the committee would vote Thursday on whether to issue the subpoenas.

In addition to the four former U.S. attorneys subpoenaed by the House (San Diego's Carol Lam, Seattle's John McKay, Nevada's David Iglesias and Arkansas' Bud Cummins), the Senate also sent letters to Nevada's Daniel Bogden and Arizona's Paul Charlton. All six attorneys reportedly received positive performance reviews from the Justice Department sometime before being fired.

Following up on the firing of the prosecutors

With a promise:

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), speaking on the Senate floor this afternoon, vowed to "get to the bottom" of the administration's December purge of federal prosecutors, and said that if they found that the prosecutors had indeed received positive job evaluations from the Justice Department before being booted, "there will be real trouble."

Update:

Justice Department officials have said that because United States attorneys are presidential appointees they may be replaced at any time without a specific reason, although they have said that none were removed for pursuing politically sensitive cases.

Another United States attorney asked to resign was Carol C. Lam of San Diego, who departed on Thursday at the request of the Justice Department. Two days earlier, Ms. Lam announced two indictments, including one against a former high-ranking Central Intelligence Agency official, in a corruption inquiry that began with last year’s guilty plea by a former Republican representative, Randy Cunningham, who was sentenced to more than eight years in prison.

And earlier in the article:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 — A United States attorney in Arkansas who was dismissed from his job last year by the Justice Department was ousted after Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel, intervened on behalf of the man who replaced him, according to Congressional aides briefed on the matter.

Ms. Miers, the aides said, phoned an aide to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales suggesting the appointment of J. Timothy Griffin, a former military and civilian prosecutor who was a political director for the Republican National Committee and a deputy to Karl Rove, the White House political adviser.

Later, the incumbent United States attorney, H. E. Cummins III, was removed without explanation and replaced on an interim basis by Mr. Griffin. Officials at the White House and Justice Department declined to comment on Ms. Miers’s role in the matter.

Is this why Carol Lam was ousted?

TPM Muckraker:

When Duke Cunningham went down in one of the largest congressional bribery scandals in history, he tried to take his main bribers with him: Mitchell Wade, who quickly confessed to the charge and has been cooperating with authorities; and Brent Wilkes, who's rebuffed Duke's accusation and maintained a stony silence to the Feds.

Now, the Wall Street Journal says that federal prosecutors are under orders to deliver a grand jury indictment against Wilkes by Feb. 15.

A note of caution: a Wilkes indictment has been rumored for months. But this has a ring of truth to it. Why? Because according to WSJ the order comes directly from just-ousted U.S. Attorney Carol Lam, who's been overseeing the case -- and who gave the order to take Wilkes down before she leaves on -- you guessed it -- February 15.

Wilkes is involved -- some say centrally -- in more than the Duke Cunningham scandal: prosecutors chasing Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) also think he holds secrets that would help make a case against the former House Approprations Committee chairman, WSJ says. One of his companies was also the recipient of a questionable earmark courtesy of Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA), who is also under scrutiny by federal investigators.

Obviously we need to focus intently on what Duke Cunningham knew and when he knew it....

David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo:

"The top FBI official for San Diego, on the firing of U.S. Attorney Carol Lam: "I guarantee politics is involved."

It's just stunning to have a FBI agent blast the Department of Justice and the White House like this.

Lam prosecuted the Duke Cunningham case and is in charge of other high-profile public corruption cases involving Republicans."

Update: Wonderful reference information about the greedy Duke and all his cohorts.

Update: Suggestion was made in comments that this company: Titan Group may have major backers still seated on Capitol Hill.