OPINION - Changes Have Taken Place Under the Obama Administration

"Eric Holder steps up, digs in, and breaks out" by Steve Benen, Maddow Blog 8/30/2013

We talked yesterday about Attorney General Eric Holder giving officials in Colorado and Washington a green light on their state measures legalizing recreational use of marijuana, but the story, which Rachel explored in more detail last night, got me thinking about Holder's tenure.

For a typical conservative, I suspect the Attorney General would top the list for his or her least favorite member of President Obama's cabinet.  Holder is truly reviled on the right, to the point that calls for his resignation have come from the RNC, many Senate Republicans, and at last count, 122 House Republicans.

But once we get past the partisan sniping and consider the policy breakthroughs, Eric Holder appears to have quietly positioned himself not only as a progressive champion, but as one of the more accomplished attorneys general in recent memory.

Think about some of the recent policies Holder has chosen to tackle:  voting rights; sentencing reforms; condemnations of "Stand Your Ground" laws, and of course the drug policy announced yesterday.  These are critically important law-enforcement policies, some of which have been neglected and ignored by officials in both parties for years, long in need of leadership -- which Holder is now providing.

Even when the Justice Department arguably went too far in subpoenaing reporters' phone logs as part of a leak investigation, it was Holder who soon after approved reforms to make it more difficult for this to happen in the future through higher search-warrant standards, and ensuring more advance notice for news organizations.

The A.G. isn't just breaking sharply with Justice Department practices in the Bush/Cheney era; Holder is changing the trajectory of regressive policies that have gotten worse for decades.

This certainly isn't to say his tenure has been flawless, but the political world generally only focuses on Holder when Republicans are attacking him, and that's a shame.  On a variety of key areas, the Attorney General seems wildly underrated.

"Feds cede ground to states in pot decriminalization" The Rachel Maddow Show, MSNBC 8/29/2013

Rachel Maddow reviews a number of changes that have taken place under the Obama administration that seemed previously impossible, including same-sex marriage, a reduction in the prison population and health care reform - and now, in small steps, a dialing back of the so-called war on drugs.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

FLORIDA - State-Sanctioned-Murder Zimmerman Verdict

My post title says how I feel.

"Justice Department Reviews Possibility of Civil Rights Case Against Zimmerman" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 7/15/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Attorney General Eric Holder called the killing of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin "tragic," but he did not comment on whether the federal government would file civil rights charges against George Zimmerman.  Gwen Ifill reports on how Americans -- who turned out for vigils and protests this weekend -- are reacting to the verdict.

"Was Justice Served in Murder Acquittal of George Zimmerman?" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 7/15/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The George Zimmerman verdict has provoked passionate debate about legal justice and race in the U.S.  Judy Woodruff gets reaction from Christina Swarns of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb, Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School, and Carol Swain of Vanderbilt Law School.

DOJ - Using Unpaid Staff

"To Cope with Sequester, Justice Department Staffs Unpaid Attorneys" by Christie Thompson, ProPublica 6/28/2013

The Department of Justice has an opening for what could be a dream job for many newly minted lawyers, serving as a special attorney in the Office of Enforcement Operations.  Among other responsibilities, the new hire could be helping the Electronic Surveillance Unit review applications for wiretaps in major federal criminal investigations.

But they’ll have to forego a salary for experience, the one-year position is completely unpaid.

We’ve reported on the mounting trend of unpaid internships among college students and recent graduates.  But an increasing number of trained attorneys in the Department of Justice are also working for free, with 13 uncompensated positions for “experienced attorneys” (many of them full-time) currently listed on the agency’s web site.

The program “provides a valuable support to the Justice Department as we continue to address the staffing challenges imposed by sequestration and still fulfill our commitment to protect the American people,” said a Justice Department spokesperson, in an emailed statement.  The Department of Justice began posting uncompensated special assistant U.S. attorney positions in January 2011, after Attorney General Eric Holder announced a department-wide hiring freeze (individual U.S. attorney offices had hired unpaid lawyers before then, the spokesperson said).

There are currently 96 unpaid special assistant U.S. attorneys working for the department, according to a spokesperson, who said paid assistant U.S attorneys have starting salaries ranging from $44,581 to $117,994.

Many of the special assistant U.S. attorneys are doing much of the same work as their paid counterparts.  According to one job posting from the U.S. attorney’s office in Puerto Rico, they “have the opportunity to represent the interests of the United States of America...and to exercise responsibility that is unparalleled in any other job that a litigator might undertake.  [They] immediately undertake numerous cases, many high profile, in any of several units within each division.”  The position requires three years of legal experience.

One former special assistant U.S. attorney, who asked not to be named, said she was given her own caseload, the way other paid assistant attorneys were.  She said the program gave her hands-on trial experience she wouldn’t have had otherwise.

Some say the program is a practical solution to growing budget pressures.  “I see [it] as a stopgap measure,” said lawyer David Lat, managing editor of the legal news site Above the Law and a former assistant U.S. attorney.  “This is an attempt to manage their caseloads and their budgets.”

The sequester slashed $1.6 billion from the Justice Department’s budget.  A November report from the Inspector General’s Office said the department should “redouble its efforts” to cut costs.

But critics say the department can’t “volunteer” its way out of a budget crisis.  “The government can’t run itself that way,” said Carrie Cordero, director of national security studies at Georgetown University Law Center and a former special assistant U.S. attorney.  “The entire government is under a budget strain. Every department can’t just start hiring free labor.”

Some assistant U.S. attorneys claim the positions violate a federal law, known as the Antideficiency Act, which says the government can’t be staffed with unpaid volunteers.

In November, the National Association of Assistant U.S.  Attorneys wrote to the to Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys to “urge the Department of Justice to discontinue the practice of hiring uncompensated [special assistant U.S attorneys].”

“The Department of Justice's continued actions to secure the unpaid services of individuals performing the same work that paid Assistant U.S. Attorneys perform is inconsistent with the Antideficiency Act,” said Bruce Moyer, counsel to the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys.

The Executive Office for U.S Attorneys responded to the association’s letter six months later, defending the unpaid positions.

“We continue to believe the department’s long-standing use of uncompensated [special assistant U.S. attorneys] is legally permissible,” wrote H. Marshall Jarrett, director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys.  While special assistant U.S. attorneys have a legal maximum salary, he said, there’s no minimum.  Which means the Justice Department considers itself free to set their salary “at a gratuitous rate of pay (i.e. $0).”

The law on government volunteers is far from cut and dry.  The Antideficiency Act’s original intent, according to the Government Accountability Office, was to keep agencies within budget by preventing them from using “volunteer” workers who would later expect to be compensated.  The GAO and the Attorney General’s office have since said some unpaid government gigs are allowed, as long as it’s clear from the outset that they’re not (and never will be) paid positions.  Agencies still can’t waive wages for employees whose salaries are fixed by statute.

The association sent a follow-up letter to Holder on June 4, calling the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys interpretation “overbroad and inconsistent” with the law.  Holder has not yet replied.

Their complaint also raised concerns about what it means to have unpaid, short-term lawyers representing the U.S. in federal court.

Cordero penned an op-ed in the National Law Journal after a number of law students she advises inquired about the unpaid positions.  Many lawyers were surprised, she said, to learn the Justice Department was hiring uncompensated attorneys.  “These are positions of public trust,” she said. “If you want top talent you pay them competitive salaries.”

Though “uncompensated” is listed on the postings in big capital letters, U.S. attorney offices say they haven’t had a shortage of qualified applicants.  Lawyer Steven J. Harper, author of “The Lawyer Bubble: A Profession in Crisis,” said that’s likely due to the grim job market facing lawyers today.

“Last year we graduated a record number of new lawyers, [and] next year we’ll graduate even more,” he said.  Of law school students that graduated in 2012, only 56 percent were able to get a full-time job requiring a law degree.

Meanwhile, “law school tuition has grown at a rate that is far greater than medical school or anything else,” Harper said.  Law school grads now face over $100,000 of debt on average.  “Who can afford to do something unpaid after you’re out of law school [with] this overhang of student loan debt?”

Unpaid lawyers in U.S. attorney offices could qualify for student loan deferment.  But as a former unpaid assistant U.S. attorney pointed out, they aren’t eligible for the Attorney Student Loan Repayment Program, which helps pay off student loans in return for a three-year position with the Department of Justice.  Most unpaid positions are capped at a year.

Many hope the use of unpaid attorneys is just a temporary fix.  But as Cordero sees it, the practice “devalues a law degree.”

“I see them do so many externships,” Cordero said of her students.  “If that’s extending to post graduation, when does it end?  At what point can they start getting paid?”

OPINION - Brooks and Marcus 5/24/2013

"Brooks and Marcus Discuss Obama's National Security Address, Disaster Spending" PBS Newshour 5/24/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus discuss the week's top political news with Judy Woodruff, including President Barack Obama's speech on refining the fight against terrorism, controversies at the IRS and the Justice Department and the devastating tornadoes in Oklahoma.

DOJ - Seizure of AP Phone Records

President Obama's administration suffering from hoof-in-mouth?

"Justice Department Seized AP Phone Records to Track Government Leaks" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 5/14/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Justice Department (DOJ) secretly subpoenaed phone records of Associated Press journalists during two months in 2012.  The AP was notified that records had been secretly seized for more than 20 of its phone lines, possibly to track government leaks of classified information about a foiled terror plot.  Judy Woodruff reports.

"Was Seizure of AP's Phone Records Justified or Harmful to Press Freedom?" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 5/14/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Judy Woodruff talks with David Schultz, legal counsel for the Associated Press, about the procedures for accessing information from the news media about confidential sources, what constitutes "crossing the line" by the government and whether the current investigation was justified by the gravity of the situation.

WAR ON TERROR - Justification for Killing Americans Abroad?!

"Justice Department Justifies Killing Americans Abroad With Links to al-Qaida" PBS Newshour 2/5/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  An internal Justice Department memo has been revealed that outlines a legal justification for the U.S. government to target and kill American citizens abroad who present an imminent threat to national security.  Attorney General Eric Holder and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney both came out to defend the rationale for killing Americans overseas, but civil liberties groups question whether the statements in the memo constitute government overreach.

Gwen Ifill spoke with Matthew Waxman, professor at Columbia Law School and a fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations, and Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project, about the language in the memo and what it could mean for national security moving forward.

WALL STREET - Standard & Poor's Fraud Lawsuit

Ah, yes.  S&Ps 'I'm not a thief' defense.

"Justice Department Charges Standard & Poor's Defrauded Investors" PBS Newshour 2/5/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Department of Justice has filed a civil suit against Wall Street’s largest credit rating agency.  Standard & Poor's is accused of knowingly committing fraud by issuing falsely inflated credit ratings between 2004 and 2007.  The government estimates that S&P could be liable for $5 billion in damage if found guilty, in what is seen as the first major federal action against a credit rating agency in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.  Sixteen states and the District of Columbia have filed similar suits.

To examine both sides of the story, Jeffrey Brown was joined separately by Lisa Madigan, Attorney General of Illinois (one of the states filing a suit), and Floyd Abrams, an attorney representing Standard & Poor’s.

BANKING - The Drug Cartels' Bank of Choice

"British Bank HSBC Makes $2 Billion Settlement on Money Laundering Charges" PBS Newshour 12/11/2012

Excerpt

JUDY WOODRUFF (Newshour): Now: The U.S. government brings its highest profile case yet of international money laundering against one of the world's biggest banks.

For years, American officials have sought and sometimes struggled to crack down on the practices. Today, the Departments of Justice and Treasury announced a settlement with HSBC.

The bank agreed to pay almost $2 billion in fines and penalties. It was charged with violating sanctions laws by conducting business with customers in Iran, Sudan, and Cuba. It was also party to helping them launder almost $900 million for Mexican drug cartels.

DOJ - Ends CIA Torture Investigation

"Justice Department Ends Investigation on Alleged Use of Torture by CIA" PBS Newshour 8/31/2012

Excerpt

MARGARET WARNER (Newshour): Late yesterday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced no one would be prosecuted in the last two outstanding cases involving the deaths of CIA detainees after 9/11.

His statement said, "The admissible evidence wouldn't be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt."

Three years ago, Holder launched a probe into whether any CIA personnel in secret overseas prisons exceeded the harsh interrogation techniques approved by the Justice Department in 2002 and in 2005.

The final two cases involved the 2002 death in Afghanistan of a suspected al-Qaida figure in an agency prison near Bagram Air Base and the 2003 death in Iraq of an Abu Ghraib prisoner during interrogation by CIA officers. A military autopsy ruled that a homicide.

The American Civil Liberties Union called Holder's decision nothing short of a scandal. Holder noted the larger issues around torture still aren't resolved, saying, "Our inquiry doesn't resolve broader questions regarding the propriety of the examined conduct."

And, for more, we turn to Ken Dilanian, who covers national security for The Los Angeles Times.

HISTORY - U.S. vs U.K. Over IRA Oral Histories

"U.S. and U.K. Entangled in Legal Battle to Release Former IRA Militants' Stories" PBS Newshour 8/23/2012

Excerpt

SUMMARY: Boston University acted as a safeguard for the oral histories of former Northern Irish militants. Participants were promised their stories would remain private until their deaths. But new clues in an unsolved murder in Ireland triggered the U.S. Department of Justice to subpoena the tapes. Special correspondent Kira Kay reports.

AMERICA - New Orleans, Most Corrupt Police Department in U.S.

"Citing Corruption and Abuse, Feds Mandate Major Reform for New Orleans Police" PBS Newshour 7/25/2012

Excerpt

GWEN IFILL (Newshour): For years, the New Orleans Police Department has labored under a long shadow of misconduct, investigations, charges and criminal convictions. Now the city has agreed to major reforms.

New Orleans now faces a sweeping federal mandate, to reform a police department plagued by corruption and abuse for decades.

ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER: This consent decree will allow us to move forward, and move forward together, and will enable the people of New Orleans to have, in the words of Mayor Landrieu -- and I quote him -- a world-class police department.

GWEN IFILL: U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder formally outlined the deal yesterday, an agreement Mayor Mitch Landrieu estimates will cost roughly $11 million a year to put in place. Landrieu said it will fundamentally change the culture of the New Orleans police once and for all.

The planned reforms include mandatory training for officers in the use of force, routine stops and searches and bias-free policing, new standards for recruiting to increase diversity on the force, and videotaping of interrogations involving suspected homicides and sexual assaults. The department must also install video cameras in all patrol cars.

ERIC HOLDER: This consent decree belongs to the entire community and includes ideas that were brought to us by community members, front-line officers and experts alike.

INTERNET - Online Piracy Fight, Push-Back

"Hackers Retaliate Against DOJ in Raging Online Piracy Fight" PBS Newshour 1/20/2012

Excerpt

MARGARET WARNER (Newshour): It's one of the largest criminal copyright cases ever brought. The target is a website based in Hong Kong that's been used to share large files, including movies, videos, television shows, e-books, games, and music.

It's called Megaupload, and the heavily visited site is said to have 150 million registered users and 50 million visits a day. Now it stands charged with storing and distributing pirated material, and thus robbing copyright holders of more than $500,000.

Yesterday, the Justice Department shut it down and released indictments against seven executives. Four were arrested at the New Zealand mansion of its founder, who goes by the name Kim Dotcom.

Within hours, the hacker collective called Anonymous retaliated, shutting down the websites of the Justice Department and major media groups, including Universal Music and the Motion Picture Association of America. The government's crackdown came one day after this week's online protests against anti-piracy bills in Congress.

Another excerpt

CECILIA KANG, The Washington Post: So there's a lot of -- there's a lot of suspicion around the timing of this. But these are two -- one should keep in mind that these are two discreet issues. There's the federal indictment of a criminal case, and then there are the two bills right now that are being proposed on the Hill that I should say actually have been on hold, today were put on hold because of all the controversy around them.

BANKING - Bank of America $335M Settlement

"Bank of America to Pay $335M to Settle Countrywide Case of Alleged Racial Bias" PBS Newshour 12/21/2011

Excerpt

JEFFREY BROWN (Newshour): The U.S. Justice Department announced a major settlement today over alleged racial bias in home mortgage lending. Bank of America agreed to pay $335 million in a case involving Countrywide Mortgage, which the bank bought in 2008.

Attorney General Eric Holder said Countrywide engaged in systematic discrimination against blacks and Hispanics.

ERIC HOLDER, U.S. attorney general: Now, these allegations represent alarming conduct by one of the largest mortgage lenders in the country during the height of the housing market boom. For example, in 2007, a qualified African-American customer in Los Angeles borrowing $200,000 paid an average of roughly $1,200 more in fees than a similarly qualified white borrower.

JEFFREY BROWN: The settlement stems from an investigation that began in 2008.

Two years later, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan filed her own lawsuit, and she worked with the Department of Justice to gain today's settlement.

Humm.... one has to wonder if BofA regrets buying Countrywide Mortgage?

This also high-lights the issue of loan brokers being paid in accordance with the loans they sell, or on commission (which is a common practice). If you want to stop abuse, just pay them a fixed salary.

AMERICA - Blocking of Phone Company Merger

"U.S. Moves to Block Merger Between AT&T and T-Mobile" by EDWARD WYATT, New York Times 8/31/2011

Excerpt

The Justice Department on Wednesday sued to block the proposed $39 billion merger between the cellphone giants AT&T and T-Mobile USA, arguing that keeping them separate would preserve competition in the wireless industry and even help save jobs of American workers.

In a lawsuit filed in Federal District Court here, the Justice Department argued that the proposed deal, which would join the nation’s second- and fourth-largest wireless phone carriers, would result in higher prices and give consumers fewer innovative products. The companies disputed those assertions, and labor unions that support the deal said that the merger would add jobs, not cost them.

“The view that this administration has is that through innovation and through competition, we create jobs,” said James M. Cole, the deputy attorney general, at a news conference announcing the lawsuit. Mergers usually reduce jobs through the elimination of redundancies, he said, “so we see this as a move that will help protect jobs in the economy, not a move that is going in any way to reduce them.”

The lawsuit, which could take years to wind its way through the courts, sets up a prominent antitrust battle — a rarity since the election of President Obama, who campaigned with promises to revitalize the Justice Department’s policing of mergers and their effects on competition, which he said had declined significantly under the Bush administration.

COMMENT: I have small experience in the phone business from a company in the past that made phone switching related equipment (in the Telephone Exchange buildings). One of the biggest mistakes the U.S. made is to break-up "Ma Bell" (AT&T) This was one case where a monopoly was a benefit to America as a whole.

Specific example, when I was working for the company the U.S. was one of the few nations (1 of 2 ?) which had appx 98% of the national phone system digital fiber-optic. Converting an old cooper-wire, mechanical switching, phone system (nation wide) to digital fiber-optic is very, very expensive. The cost was worth it to "Ma Bell" because they could directly benefit. The "Baby Bells" cannot afford this type of investment. Hence, the final step in upgrading our national phone system did NOT happen, running digital fiber-optic directly into your home or office. Most homes and offices still use copper land-line from phone switching stations into the home/office.

Of course, things have change with the advent of wireless cell phones, which is why the cell/smart phone providers are now the leaders in growth and innovation in phone systems. Heck, I know of many people who do not have a land-line phone in their home.

ECONOMY - Focus on S&P Ratings

"U.S. Inquiry Is Said to Focus on S.&P. Ratings" by LOUISE STORY, New York Times 8/17/2011

Excerpt

The Justice Department is investigating whether the nation’s largest credit ratings agency, Standard & Poor’s, improperly rated dozens of mortgage securities in the years leading up to the financial crisis, according to two people interviewed by the government and another briefed on such interviews.

The investigation began before Standard & Poor’s cut the United States’ AAA credit rating this month, but it is likely to add fuel to the political firestorm that has surrounded that action. Lawmakers and some administration officials have since questioned the agency’s secretive process, its credibility and the competence of its analysts, claiming to have found an error in its debt calculations.

In the mortgage inquiry, the Justice Department has been asking about instances in which the company’s analysts wanted to award lower ratings on mortgage bonds but may have been overruled by other S.& P. business managers, according to the people with knowledge of the interviews. If the government finds enough evidence to support such a case, which is likely to be a civil case, it could undercut S.& P.’s longstanding claim that its analysts act independently from business concerns.

It is unclear if the Justice Department investigation involves the other two ratings agencies, Moody’s and Fitch, or only S.& P.

During the boom years, S.& P. and other ratings agencies reaped record profits as they bestowed their highest ratings on bundles of troubled mortgage loans, which made the mortgages appear less risky and thus more valuable. They failed to anticipate the deterioration that would come in the housing market and devastate the financial system.Since the crisis, the agencies’ business practices and models have been criticized from many corners, including in Congressional hearings and reports that have raised questions about whether independent analysis was corrupted by the drive for profits.

DUH! No kidding, "corrupted by the drive for profits." You bet, that's the way Wall Street works.

IMMIGRATION - Arizona Sheriff, "Up-Yours" Civil Rights

"U.S. sues controversial Arizona sheriff in civil-rights investigation" by Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times 9/2/2010

Excerpt

Justice Department officials say Maricopa County's Joe Arpaio failed to turn over documents in a probe of his agency's immigration enforcement operations. Among his tactics are 'sweeps' of immigrant-heavy neighborhoods.

The U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday announced it had sued Joe Arpaio, the controversial sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona, for failing to turn over documents in a probe of whether his aggressive operations against illegal immigrants had violated civil rights.

The litigation came two months after a Justice Department lawsuit halted a tough new Arizona immigration law, which Arpaio strongly supported. The new lawsuit is unrelated to the immigration law and stems from an investigation into the sheriff's immigration enforcement operations. The department said it was the first time in 30 years a police agency had not cooperated in a civil-rights probe.

"The actions of the sheriff's office are unprecedented. It is unfortunate that the department was forced to resort to litigation to gain access to public documents and facilities," said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the civil-rights division, in a statement.

Arpaio's attorney said he could not comment on the lawsuit until he had time to review it.

For more than three years, Arpaio has attracted praise as well as condemnation for using his deputies to track down illegal immigrants. The most high-profile example is his so-called "sweeps," during which deputies flood immigrant-heavy neighborhoods, stop people for minor infractions such as driving with a broken taillight and check their immigration status. The tactics have made Arpaio popular in Arizona, the main gateway for illegal immigrants into the United States, but also have drawn widespread complaints that he unfairly targets Latinos.

Concentration camps? What concentration camps. Wish we could brand serial numbers on their arms though.

POLITICS - Latest from Gonzo World aka Bush Empire

"Gonzales Hospital Episode Detailed" by Dan Eggen & Paul Kane, Washington Post

On the night of March 10, 2004, as Attorney General John D. Ashcroft lay ill in an intensive-care unit, his deputy, James B. Comey, received an urgent call.

White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales and President Bush's chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., were on their way to the hospital to persuade Ashcroft to reauthorize Bush's domestic surveillance program, which the Justice Department had just determined was illegal.

In vivid testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, Comey said he alerted FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and raced, sirens blaring, to join Ashcroft in his hospital room, arriving minutes before Gonzales and Card. Ashcroft, summoning the strength to lift his head and speak, refused to sign the papers they had brought. Gonzales and Card, who had never acknowledged Comey's presence in the room, turned and left.

The sickbed visit was the start of a dramatic showdown between the White House and the Justice Department in early 2004 that, according to Comey, was resolved only when Bush overruled Gonzales and Card. But that was not before Ashcroft, Comey, Mueller and their aides prepared a mass resignation, Comey said. The domestic spying by the National Security Agency continued for several weeks without Justice approval, he said.

"I was angry," Comey testified. "I thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me."

The broad outlines of the hospital-room conflict have been reported previously, but without Comey's gripping detail of efforts by Card, who has left the White House, and Gonzales, now the attorney general. His account appears to present yet another challenge to the embattled Gonzales, who has strongly defended the surveillance program's legality and is embroiled in a battle with Congress over the dismissals of nine U.S. attorneys last year.

It also marks the first public acknowledgment that the Justice Department found the original surveillance program illegal, more than two years after it began.

Red emphases mine

I watched the testimony and was shocked at such behavior from people sworn to uphold our Constitution and self-professed practitioners of ethical behavior (which they have never been).

ABSOLUTE, TOTAL ARROGANCE! The Bush Administration is in fact Fascist Dictatorship, or very close.

Also very childish, like a child going to pop after mom has denied or said "no" to something the child wants.

POLITICS - Today's news from Bushworld and Gonzoland

"New Documents Show Republican Involvement in U.S. Attorney Firings" WorldNow and KRNV Ch 4, Reno Nevada

Newly released documents are shedding light on the dismissal of U.S. Attorney for Nevada Daniel Bogden.

According to the documents, Bogden was told he was being dismissed because the Bush administration had a short window to get others into prosecutor jobs to bolster their resumes.

Bogden said Associate Attorney General William Mercer told him in December that the firings were being carried out so, in his words, "the Republican Party would have more future candidates for the federal bench and future political positions."

POLITICS - The Obstruction Department of the Bush Administration

"Gonzales’s Justice Department Obstructed Investigation of Republican Congressmen" by Scott Horton, Harper's Magazine

The Wall Street Journal now confirms what we’ve known from the beginning: Alberto Gonzales’s Justice Department put the brakes on criminal investigations targeting a number of Republican congressmen in an effort to insure that no indictments were returned before the November 2006 elections. How did that work? The U.S. attorneys need to get a go-ahead from Washington before seeking indictments of key figures such as members of Congress. As we learned previously in the case involving Randy “Duke” Cunningham and other California congressmen, Gonzales’s Justice Department held this process up inexplicably for many months—with an obvious intention of ensuring that the indictments did not adversely affect the Republicans’ election efforts. Now the Journal tracks what happened in the Rick Renzi case, and finds the same practice of obstruction.

Note the link to the Wall Street Journal article.

POLITICS - Hope In the Winds?

"Low-key office launches high-profile inquiry" by Tom Hamburger, LA Times

The Office of Special Counsel will investigate U.S. attorney firings and other political activities led by Karl Rove.

Please, please God, let it be so.