Bypassing the Vetting Process

by emptywheel

Remember how I doubted Michael Isikoff, who suggested Jeffrey Taylor was responsible for launching the probe into Monica Goodling's politicization of the hiring process? Well, let's just say I trust Carol Leonnig much more than I trust Isikoff. Much much more. And Leonnig provides a different explanation for the start of the probe.

That probe began when Goodling allegedly tried to hold up the hiring of another prosecutor whom Taylor was recruiting, according to two law enforcement sources familiar with the inquiry.

Goodling said the candidate, a government civil rights lawyer, appeared to lean Democratic, two sources said yesterday. Taylor ultimately gained permission from the Justice Department to bypass Goodling and hire prosecutors without her review. He hired the civil rights lawyer, who is scheduled to start work on Monday.

But Chuck Rosenberg, the U.S. attorney in Alexandria, heard about Taylor's allegations and referred the matter to the agency's inspector general and its Office of Professional Responsibility while serving as Gonzales's interim chief of staff in March and April, according to two law enforcement sources.

A crucial difference--Taylor didn't start the investigation into Goodling, Chuck Rosenberg did. Let me remind you that it appears that Rosenberg also made sure the appropriate agency--OIG as opposed to OPR, as Gonzales had tried to arrange--was investigating the USA firings more generally. No wonder Gonzales decided not to nominate Rosenberg to be Chief of Staff permanently--he is too damn honest!

Go read the rest of Leonnig's article--it's full of important revelations. The main point of the story is that the jokingly racist Jay Apperson, formerly Gonzales counsel, got hired as an AUSA in our nation's capitol without undergoing the normal screening process. There are two things that, had Apperson been subjected to normal vetting, would have disqualified him to serve in DC. He was basically ousted from a job under Congressman Sensenbrenner for inappropriately intervening in a pending case [analogy removed per bmaz]. And he proposed a White History month while working as an AUSA in Virgina. But in spite of getting removed from one prior government position and not invited back for another because of his inappropriate behavior, this is what Jeff Taylor says of Apperson:

"Sure, he's made some mistakes in judgment," Taylor said. "For gosh sakes, everybody deserves a second chance."

Oh--it's probably worth mentioning that Apperson is a true believer on aggressive sentencing. For other people.

But there's one other detail from Leonning's story that deserves some emphasis. There are others that Taylor has allowed to bypass the normal screening process.

Taylor said he has hired 20 prosecutors since he took over in September and has allowed one other -- who was rejoining the Washington office after a few years' hiatus -- to bypass the screening process.

He said half a dozen other prosecutors in the office skipped the screening process because of their experience, but he acknowledged that many others were screened, particularly if they were assigned to D.C. Superior Court.

Seven more prosecutors who have bypassed the screening process, out of twenty hired in since late September of last year, when Taylor was appointed. To serve as prosecutors in the district that would oversee any kind of wrong doing--such as the obstruction of investigations into, say, illegal hiring practices at DOJ. Do you see how neat this whole system is?

Hmm. I think I was right to suspect Isikoff's story making Taylor look like a veritable whistleblower...

Comments

[emptywheel]

Note: just in case anyone wants to have a discussion of how Isikoff works, here's his statement on the Goodling inquiry:

Two government officials (not ID'd when talking about an ongoing probe) told NEWSWEEK the inquiry began after Jeff Taylor, the interim U.S. attorney in D.C., complained that Goodling tried to block the hiring of a prosecutor in his office for being a "liberal Democratic type."

He doesn't tell a different story than Leonnig. He tells an incomplete one. And by leaving the rest unexplained--how we got from Taylor to OPR--he leaves a completely inaccurate suggestion about Taylor.

[Nan]

Good call, EW!
Thanks for your continued efforts - great stuff!

[freepatriot]

so EW, what do you do, sit around all day lookin this stuff up ???

I'm pretty good at spotting a bullshitter, but I have a problem detailing all of the little clues that cause me to know I'm dealing with a bullshitter

you seem to have no problem with this at all

you're like Michigan's version of Vincent Gambini or something

I guess your finished with this guy ???

on a personal note: so why didn't you go to law school, EW ???

and why not go now ???

Trust me dude, I've seen your parents argue, they're amatuers

[randiego]

What FP said!
Uncanny.

[Redshift]

So is there anything we can do about this (by which I guess I mean "pressure our reps to do") other than wait for the next administration? We have an ever growing number of foxes under the jurisdiction of the Eastern Henhouse of Virginia, and, we need to have someone other than other foxes to criminally investigate them.

If this were a normal administration with a sense of shame, revealing that attorneys had been hired through an illegal process (political litmus test) or an improper process (to skirt the political litmus test) would be enough to get them to resign, but I don't see that happening here.

[Sojourner]

I just wonder how the hell you can write this stuff so fast! I write professionally (in a different venue) but I cannot come up with stuff nearly so fast as you do...

Does smoke come off your keyboard? ;-)

[tekel]

"Sure, he's made some mistakes in judgment," Taylor said. "For gosh sakes, everybody deserves a second chance."

can anyone tell me why this kind of attitude is acceptable? NOBODY deserves a goddamn thing in this world. The 'second chance' doctrine is entirely incompatible with the neocon philosophy. Actions have consequences, and when you screw up, you should pay the price for it. If the manager can't fire a failed employee, perhaps it is the manager who is a failure?

[bmaz]

I am no fan of this cluck Apperson, and there is NO WAY he should be rehired anywhere in the Justice Department, he is disqualified for forging/misappropriating Sensebrenner's signature. However, that act is not directly analogous to the Iglesias/ Charlton situations. In Iglesias and Charlton, congresscritters tried to put pressure on prosecutorial discretion; strictly verbotten. In the Apperson scenario, irrespective of whether it was Apperson or Sensebrenner behind the communication, the communication was in effect a sentencing recommendation to a judge. This in no way per se makes it necessarily proper, but it is far different than trying to affect a charging decision.

[emptywheel]

Redshift

Oh, dont' worry, I think you're particularly henhouse is proving to be particularly well-guarded--Chuck Rosenberg seems to be a real straight shooter, and recommended two DOJ investigations that were appropriate.

It's DC that we need to worry about. You know--they guy enforcing any subpoenas Congress issues? The guy we're counting on to arrest Condi for contempt after Waxman's patience gives out?

bmaz

Point well taken.

[Polly]

Why would there be twenty vacancies in Taylor's office since he took over last September? Isn't twenty a lot?

Aren't these Assistant USA positions civil service, different from the four year limited term of political appointees?

Did twenty civil service attorneys quit rather than work for a "loyal Bushie"?

[emptywheel]

Polly

It could be any number of things, though it is a question I am curious to have answered myself. Most USA offices have a bunch of unfilled AUSA positions--it allows DOJ to pretend they have increased FTEs without actually spending the money. Perhaps, in Taylor's case (perhaps in the case of the favorites?) he actually got to fill those unfilled AUSAs.

[orionATL]

polly's question is a good one.

i would add a related question/comment:

twenty gov hires in seven months is extraordinary SPEED. a lot of the usual steps for federal hiring must have been compressed greatly or ignored.

sounds like they were in one hell of a rush to gear up for something.

[orionATL]

i wonder where the twenty came from

and

what might be their common denominator.

[orionATL]

maybe these hires were a result of the sampson/goodling "special powers" memo signed by gonzales.

maybe opm was the source of the leak about this secret memo.

[Polly]

sounds like they were in one hell of a rush to gear up for something.
Posted by: orionATL

After Nov. 7, could the D.C.'s USA be gearing up to throw rocks in the path of the Congressional investigations they knew would be coming?

These wheels within wheels are beginning to scare me.