But that’s news from nowhere.
Political adviser Karl Rove and other officials inside George W. Bush’s White
House pushed for the firing of a key federal prosecutor because he wasn’t
cooperating with Republican plans for indicting Democrats and their allies
before the 2006 election, according to internal documents and depositions.The evidence was released Tuesday and turned over to a special
prosecutor by House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers. It contradicts
claims by Rove and other senior Bush administration officials that the White
House played only a minimal role in the firing of David Iglesias and eight other
US attorneys who were deemed by a Justice Department official as not “loyal
Bushies.”In a recent interview with The New York Times and The
Washington Post, Rove downplayed his role in the firings, saying he only acted
as a “conduit” for complaints that Republican Party officials and GOP lawmakers
sent to him about the federal prosecutors. The documents tell a different story.The documents reveal that Rove, his White House aides and then-White
House counsel Harriet Miers actively participated in the decision to oust New
Mexico US Attorney David Iglesias because Republicans had wanted him to bring
charges against Democrats regarding alleged voter fraud and other issues.
Iglesias refused to do that.
As I’ve mentioned before, this case has some Arkansas ties, and not just the firing of Bud Cummins.
The newly released documents also show that Kansas City US Attorney Todd Graves
was removed in a deal between the White House and Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri that
appears to have been personally approved by Rove.According to the
documents, Bond agreed to lift his hold on an Arkansas judge nominated to the
Eighth Circuit federal appeals court in exchange for Graves’s firing. A December
21, 2005, e-mail sent by White House lawyer Fred Klingler to Miers stated that
“Karl is fine” with the proposal.
Lot’s of corruption to go around, inside the Bush Administration and from Republicans in Congress. Hopefully, these guys pay a price for this. They belong in a jail cell, and no one is above the law. (Or at least they shouldn’t be; doesn’t always work out that way in practice.) My big fear with all we’ve seen the last eight years: the domestic spying, the Attorney Firing Scandal, the signing statements, the lies about war and WMDs, and (especially) the torture, is that if the people who commited these heinous things aren’t held accountable, something akin to them, something worse, could happen down the road. Sure, there was a lot of really terrible stuff to come ouf of the Bush Administration, though honestly I think that Bush himself may have meant well to some degree. (Cheney, however, is the Devil.) But what happens if someone with more imagination, more political skill, the right combination of circumstances, and a Cheney mentality comes along in the future? What is our country in store for then if we don’t put the wheels of justice into motion? It’s something to think about.
I think you are correct in assuming that if we do not hold these administration people accountable that the rules will become lax. The law is only as good as those who enforce it. I honestly think that the people tasked with law enforcement (the executive branch) really should step up their game and go after these guys. Screw political points on the right, he (Obama) took an oath (twice) to protect and maintain the constitution. Within that oath is duty to faithfully execute the laws of the land. This case (and the ones surrounding it) do certainly apply.
My point is simply your point: get to it.
CJS