by emptywheel
Bill Mercer's announcement that he's stepping down is much more interesting than the other clique resignations for several reasons (thanks to TeddySF for the heads up). First, his "resignation" does not mean he leaves DOJ; rather, he simply avoids a nomination hearing. And that's a nomination hearing that would have been challenging, to say the least.
William W. Mercer -- who had been acting associate attorney general since September -- withdrew his nomination for the job just days before he was scheduled to appear at a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing Tuesday.
[snip]
"After much consideration, I have concluded that it is highly unlikely that both the Judiciary Committee and the Senate will take prompt action on my nomination in the near term, if ever," Mercer wrote.
[snip]
Justice officials said Mercer made the decision to withdraw, based on his assessment of expected opposition from many Democrats and uncertain support from Republicans. No GOP members were expected to show up for Tuesday's confirmation hearing because of the Senate immigration debate, one official said.
But note the word games! Mercer claims he was resigning because SJC wouldn't act on his nomination--but there was a hearing scheduled for Tuesday, so it's clear they were prepared to act on his nomination. Further, note that the official in the last paragraph here appears to be a Justice Department official. So while DOJ is spinning GOP Senators' refusal to appear at a Mercer hearing as related to the immigration debate, that information is not coming from someone--such as a GOP Senator--who would know why the GOP was going to stand up Mercer.
Which all suggests we need to read this resignation as something different--not an attempt to leave DOJ, but a move to make sure Mercer can stay at DOJ, even if only in his role as USA for Montana. And I find that interesting for a few reasons--it raises questions about why it was so important for Mercer to remain USA in Montana, when he really hasn't been focusing on his job there for about 3 years.
Two things, of course, come to mind. Jack Abramoff and Native American issues.
As I said, Bill Mercer hasn't really been focused on day to day events in Montana for several years, since he first got a no-nomination acting appointment at Main DOJ. But one thing has been occurring--or not occurring--in Montana. The biggest beneficiary of Jack Abramoff's largesse, Conrad Burns, has somehow managed to avoid the increasing scrutiny that John Doolittle and Bob Ney received. There has long been a question of whether Mercer has retained his appointment in Montana in an effort to protect Burns, and now it appears he can do little but that.
But Mercer is also a key anti-NAIS figure on the Native American Issues Subcommittee. As the email dumps showed, for example, Mercer was the person who heard Chiara's appeal to retain a staffer for the Subcommittee. Which he promptly ignored and persuaded her not to make the kind of stink that might have resulted in her reversing that order. In other words, Mercer looks like precisely the kind of person the Administration has been stacking NAIS with in the last year. By retaining Mercer, even if only as USA of Montana, you ensure that NAIS retains its anti-Native American bias.
Trust me--the Administration felt it important to retain Mercer out in Montana. It's something Gonzales himself emphasized in his statement on Mercer's resignation:
Gonzales said in a statement that he was "very pleased that the department will continue to benefit" from Mercer's talent in Montana.
It sure sounds like they were worried they'd have to forgo Mercer's services in Montana, and therefore decided to sacrifice him at Main DOJ.
Good morning!
Many thanks for being willing to sideline CIPA and Libby for this sidelight/insight on Mercer. A couple of questions that are not OT, I think:
1. is it true that the Senate committee on Indian affairs holds hundreds of thousands of documents collected for their Abramoff investigation that were not exploited at the time.
2. If true, are they potentially useful for e-mail use by WH via the RCN and maybe DOJ, think Mercer?
3. If true then why the hell have we not heard anything from that committee and is there anything we can do about it?
Posted by: BlueStateRedhead | June 23, 2007 at 10:25
If you read dengre @ dailykos, you will find out that he believes that McCain (as former committee chair) stonewalled the investigation. He says that 750,000 e-mails were subpoened. I wrote to the current chairman (Dorogan) and absolutely no response.
Wanna' do something about this? Write to Waxman, Conyers and Lehey and see which one will check it out first. I've written to all of them and NOTHING!
I think they must be useful... but I don't know if it has anything to do with Mercer. McCain knows but he is about on his way out of the Senate and out to some old people's home in AZ. People who say he has integrity are certainly wrong!
Who knows why. We can only speculate. However, the question in my mind is if the committee is holding them or if they've been sent to DOJ for safekeeping
As I said, we should call and write to all of them demanding ACTION! They may not need to take them to court to find missing e-mails. They may be sitting on them and they may be too stupid to know it.
I don't have the dengre diary URLS, but they are there. He has written many, many times on this subject and knows what he is talking about!
Posted by: victoria2dc | June 23, 2007 at 15:11
If you read dengre @ dailykos, you will find out that he believes that McCain (as former committee chair) stonewalled the investigation. He says that 750,000 e-mails were subpoened. I wrote to the current chairman (Dorogan) and absolutely no response.
Wanna' do something about this? Write to Waxman, Conyers and Lehey and see which one will check it out first. I've written to all of them and NOTHING!
I think they must be useful... but I don't know if it has anything to do with Mercer. McCain knows but he is about on his way out of the Senate and out to some old people's home in AZ. People who say he has integrity are certainly wrong!
Who knows why. We can only speculate. However, the question in my mind is if the committee is holding them or if they've been sent to DOJ for safekeeping
As I said, we should call and write to all of them demanding ACTION! They may not need to take them to court to find missing e-mails. They may be sitting on them and they may be too stupid to know it.
I don't have the dengre diary URLS, but they are there. He has written many, many times on this subject and knows what he is talking about!
Posted by: Victoria2dc | June 23, 2007 at 18:41