Changing the Rules
by emptywheel
DiFi has a habit of using hearings to introduce new allegations against DOJ and she has done so again today. Here's Christy's version of the interchange:
Read to you what has been dropped from the earlier addition of the DOJ manual. (1) restriction on bringing a voter fraud case close to an election. (2) Care for overt investigations in the pre-election period and while election is underway. “Most if not all prosecutions and investigations should await the end of the election.” — underlined in the prior volume — has been removed. Reason for that was to not impact the election. Gonzales, predictably, has no idea what Feinstein is talking about and can’t answer why those changes were made.
The issue is that DOJ has recently revised the US Attorney's (I think) manual. And they weakened--and in one important case--removed the restrictions on taking voting rights cases in the days leading up to an election.
In other words, DOJ just made it easier to tamper with elections by taking political cases against organizations like ACORN.
Later in the hearing (if I'm correct), Jeff Sessions (!?!?!) pursued this further, asking who approved the changes in the manual. Here's how Helen captured the exchange:
Sessions: what do you mean that you did not know about the voting manual changes? Who signed off on that?
Abu: DAG
Sessions: ou delegated that?
Abu: I can’t answer that.
I'm betting the same guy who came up with a list of 7 USAs to fire because they were prosecuting Republicans made the change. You know, Alberto Gonzales' special friend...
Does it rhyme with Snarl Cover?
Posted by: John B. | July 24, 2007 at 12:16
Some creepy guy, like the Dick or Chimpy McStupid?
Posted by: GREYDOG | July 24, 2007 at 12:23
Impeach Gonzo: he obviously isn't competent to run a pushcart.
A pushbroom at the end of a parade, that he might be able to manage.
Posted by: P J Evans | July 24, 2007 at 12:28
At this point Gonzo is beaten. But will it have any real impact? He won't step down. He'll stand there like a punching bag till his stuffing falls out. Gonna have to impeach, and there is enough grounds to build a hotel upon.
Posted by: Dismayed | July 24, 2007 at 13:12
Plame had Congress change the jobs for the AGs. Specter ws behind some of the legislation.
Posted by: FRE | July 24, 2007 at 14:08
There's nothing like an indictment, or even just a leaked FBI investigation, to swing an election.
Absent an explanation (and does anyone think the DOJ or the White House will give an answer, never mind an honest answer, to the question:
Why was this policy changed, by whom and on whose authority?
Apart from how these changes in DOJ policy are connected to the US Attorney firings, can we hold an election and know the US Attorneys or other prosecutors won't try to swing it to the Republicans with a politically motivated unjust indictment?
Posted by: Neil | July 24, 2007 at 23:30
Good grief! Either he or Schlozman was asked questions about the manual in a previous hearing, I don't remember. This is a sign of terminal carelessness.
(Atmosphere at Kos so nasty did not have heart to turn on PC during hearing hours)
Posted by: 4jkb4ia | July 25, 2007 at 10:45
Good catch. I happened to see the Feinstein exchange noted the importance of the charge. This info majorly underlines the notion that no "law" was broken by the dismissals. Her point, as I understood it, is that the USAs were following the guidelines with regard to election fraud and some were dismissed because of that. Problem for admin? Simple; change the guidelines. Jeez. I'm not in favor of impeachment, but watching Gonzales play front man and rope-a-dope made me want to give him such a smack.
Posted by: Jason_M | July 26, 2007 at 00:05
amphibia margarin sialolithiasis awanting lightboat unvigilant invector restibrachium
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000757.htm >Shy-Drager Syndrome
http://www.plywood2plastic.co.uk
Posted by: Valeria Barlow | December 16, 2007 at 06:46