Blogged by Brad from Nashville…It’s not easy keeping up from the road. But we’re doing our best….
Leahy on Meet the Press today (via TPM, who has more, video available at C&L)…
LEAHY: That is something that the whole Congress has to vote on. In our case, in the Senate, we’d have to vote on it; in the House, they would have to vote on it. I can’t…
RUSSERT: Would you go that far?
LEAHY: If they don’t cooperate, yes, I’d go that far. I mean, this is very important to the American people.
Leahy’s comments synch up with what Conyer’s telegraphed a week during a House Judiciary hearing when he asked outgoing Dep. AG Paul McNulty if the DoJ would work with Congress should the White House ignore their subpoenas and it became necessary to issue criminal contempt charges. (For the record, McNulty punted in response, stating he’s recused himself from the issue, will likely be gone by then, since he’s already resigned, and otherwise, couldn’t speak for the DoJ on the matter.)
Washington Post noticed Leahy’s comments as well, and offers this road map to what comes next in their Monday edition…
“Referred to a U.S. attorney.” See what a frickin’ mess we’re looking at here? The USA in question would be Jeffrey A. Taylor of the District of Columbia. Unless he gets fired any time soon. Don’t know much about Taylor, with no time to dig for now. So feel free to fill us in with any thoughts on him in comments.
As the Summer of Accountability continues…
http://wsws.org/articles/2007/m...just-m10.shtml
“The US Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeffrey Taylor, complained of pressure from Goodling and other Justice Department officials to block the hiring of a prosecutor viewed as a “liberal Democratic type.” Instead, they sought the appointment of Jay Apperson as an assistant US attorney. Apperson was a veteran of the Kenneth Starr Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky investigations who was forced to resign a congressional staff position in 2005 for falsifying the signature of Republican congressman James Sensenbrenner on a letter to a federal judge complaining about a sentencing decision. Taylor eventually hired both men.”
Jeffrey Taylor was involved with Kyle Sampson since day one of the US Attorney firing.
http://bp3.blogger.com/_HFQdVDl...t.+targets.JPG
Means he can NOT stand in to any part of the investigation, he’s automatically recused going by the law.
April 14, 2007
From a DC lawyer reader:
Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez appointed Jeffrey Taylor to be the US Attorney for the District of Columbia in late September 2006 under the now-infamous provision of the Patriot Act allowing the Attorney General to appoint interim US Attorneys:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/US...ney/index.html
At that point, it was evident that the Democrats would retake control of the House of Representatives and that Henry Waxman (D-CA) would be the next chairman of House [Oversight and Government Reform] Committee, with its vast oversight jurisdiction. In fact, numerous stories like ths one had appeared in major newspapers indicating that Waxman would wage a war of oversight on the White House:
http://www.latimes.com/news/pol...lines-politics
It seems apparent that Taylor was placed in to his position to specifically frustrate any Congressional oversight effort.
So how is it that the US Attorney for the District of Columbia spot so conveniently became open at such a critical time? …
Ken Wainstein was the US Attorney for the Districty of Columbia prior to Jeffrey Taylor. …
He was in office only six months before being kicked upstairs to become the first Assistant Attorney General for the new National Security Division at the Justice Department.
Posted by Laura at April 14, 2007 02:16 PM
http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/005964.html
Jeffrey A. Taylor is a loyal bushie, put there in advance for exactly one purpose.
To camouflage the process while at the same time letting the prosecution of contempt of congress die a slow death behind the scenes.
Harper’s Magazine has a good article that reveals some questionable practices Taylor has exhibited. The article correctly points out:
Now we get the picture. The sneak change in the law by loyal Department of
JusticeJust Us bushies hidden from congress that allowed his appointment by Gonzales without Senate consent was a deliberate move to obstruct justice.The Washington Post has a similar article to the same effect. Indications are that an investigation into Taylor’s hiring practices are ongoing.
The story expands with this:
(ibid, emphasis added). Yep, he has put cronies in place.
Jeffrey Taylor, just like Paul McNulty was involved in the firings process and investigation. By default, he has to be recused from the case. Recused the same way as Gonzales….
Then they have to vote on a new Attorney and career person.
I wonder if Taylor remembers that his first legal position was for a famous democrat in Nevada?
He was hired as a lawclerk (1991-1992) to the Chief Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court (ibid).
That Judge was a fair person, and would not approve of the concept of a Department of
JusticeJust Us, and to the extent Taylor has violated that, he is without excuse as to whether or not he ever had a good role model.Some years after that he worked for Orin Hatch in the congress, who is not a good role model when it comes to partisanship.
Can Taylor be forced to recuse himself? Who enforces that?
If it weren’t for Patrick Leahy and Henry Waxman the whole Democratic party would be completely invisible…Yes Mr. Leahy, you most difinately should press forward on Contempt of Congress charges for Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales…and let’s not forget Ms. Rice’s refusal to acknowledge a congressional subpoena