Former U.S. Attorney: Why I Was Fired
Exclusive: John McKay Says White House Didn't Like His Handling Of Disputed Election
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Former U.S. Atty. Unhappy
Former U.S. Attorney John McKay, described as an "effective" and "well-regarded" leader, is unhappy because he believes his firing was political. Sandra Hughes reports.
-
Video
Bush: Mistakes Were Made
CBS News RAW: During a question and answer session at a news conference in Mexico, President Bush said he thought the firings of federal prosecutors were mishandled.
-
Video
Attorney Gen. On Controversy
Harry Smith grills Attorney General Alberto Gonzales about the recent dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys and how the White House played a role in this issue.
-
Photo
Former U.S. Attorney John McKay told CBS News he was given no reason for his firing. (CBS)
-
Who's Who
Firings Firestorm
Justice Department at center of controversy over firing of eight U.S. attorneys.
-
Interactive
Bush Presidency
The president's agenda, plus facts, figures, major events and key personalities.
-
Interactive
The Bush Cabinet
A look at departures, new nominees and long-standing members of the president's staff.
"I am disappointed with the president," says John McKay, former chief prosecutor for western Washington state. "I am disappointed with the attorney general."
McKay was fired in December for reasons he now believes had nothing to do with the way he did his job — but very much to do with politics.
"I asked for the reasons that I was being asked to resign and I was given no reasons," he says.
McKay's office convicted the "millennium bomber" who was planning to blow up the Los Angeles airport and won a conviction against James Ujaama, who was planning to build an al Qaeda training camp in Oregon. He was also lauded for cracking down on drug smuggling from Canada.
So when the attorney general said McKay was fired for performance reasons, he was livid.
"I knew that was false and I felt obligated to speak up," McKay says.
CBS News obtained McKay's most recent performance review, conducted just three months before his firing. In it, he was described as "effective, well-regarded and a capable leader."
McKay feels "really proud of the work that was done in my office and the excellent run I had in five years."
Justice officials say they had a problem with the way McKay shared information with local and federal law enforcement officials. But McKay believes it was what he didn't do that got him fired.
A Democratic candidate won Washington state's 2004 gubernatorial race by just a couple of hundred votes. McKay didn't call a grand jury to investigate questions of voter fraud, and he heard about it when he sought a promotion.
"I did apply to be a federal judge last fall, and at that time questions were directed to me about the 2004 governor's election in Washington state," he says.
Shortly after, McKay was listed as a U.S. attorney "being pushed out" in an e-mail between the Department of Justice and the White House.
"Any individual prosecutor is replaceable," McKay concedes. "What's not replaceable is our reputation for fairness and our reputation for independence from political influences."
No longer prosecuting al Qaeda suspects or drug smugglers for the U.S. government, McKay's now teaching law to students who may get a crash course in Bush administration politics.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Video and Galleries from CBS Evening News
- Latest in CBS Evening News
- Non-Jackson News You May Have Missed
- Questions Remain in Jackson's Death
- No Problems With Jackson Crowd Control



- 1
- 2
- next
See all 90 CommentsTHe NYT reported all of Clinton's were fired. No big deal then, why now ?
Politics has again proven itself to be only a power trip.
Speedy must go !
George Bush and Karl Rove have attempted to murder law through courtroom politics. Ask yourself is that REALLY what we want?
He should call the class 'How to create a fascist state 101'.
Gore 08'
In the final analysis, US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President; he can fire them for ANYTHING. Get over it!
clinton
%u201CThe question is, did they have the same reaction if they were in the Congress in the %u201990s or did they have the same reaction if they were in the %u201980s? Every president comes in and appoints U.S. attorneys and then makes changes over the course of their time.%u201D
Funny he should say that. In fact, the Republicans made a big stink when Bill Clinton replaced U.S. attorneys at the beginning of his first term.
This is standard practice for a president at the beginning of his first term. I believe Bush II replaced all of Bill Clinton%u2019s appointees, and no one complained.
But in 1993 the GOP Noise Machine made the replacing of U.S. attorneys by Clinton into a big scandal. Wingnuts alleged that Clinton was trying to impede the investigation of Rep. Dan Rostenkowski. (Rostenkowski was indicted the following year; I assume the indictment was brought by a Clinton appointee.)
It is extremely unusual, however, for U.S. attorneys to be replaced in mid-term except for cases of gross misconduct, which doesn%u2019t seem to be the case with the eight who have been purged so far.
http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/09/1520/
good to "see" your voice again! hope you fine - not breaking too many balkan hearts ?
i run into those hot-heads on in a while - they make good kindling for my fire!
take care!
the provision in the Patriot Act
that allowed such firings was no accident. %u201CWhen you see an administration trying to try to put into legislation something this specific, this tailored, it does not come out of nowhere,%u201D said Turley.
%u201CIt did not come out of the head of Zeus,%u201D Turley said. %u201CIt came out of the head of someone at the White House who wanted to use it. I think there are serious questions there and this is a scandal that is getting worse by the day.%u201D
http://www.customscorruption.com/hitler.htm
Posted by elz523 at 05:37 AM : Mar 15, 2007
I believe they fully intended to turn this nation into a Fascist State, much like they have turned the State of Texas. A nation where the Bill of Rights still existed but were nothing but window dressing. I can see no other reason for what they slid into the Patriot Act or several other actions they took right after the attack.
In the final analysis, US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President; he can fire them for ANYTHING. Get over it!
Posted by msgmorris at 06:53 AM : Mar 15, 2007
Haven't you had enough of this? Haven't you been told this enough? Of course there is a Difference between what Clinton did and what President Bush did. When we turn our justice system into a Political Football, when good people like this man are trashed because he, in his PROFESSIONAL opinion, didn't go after people who he thought were not guilty WE lessen ourselves as people. This is NOT right and NO President on record has done what this one did. Maybe it's time you folks stopped just repeating Talking Points and started thinking for yourselves.
Posted by trueprogress at 01:33 AM : Mar 15, 2007
YOU didn't READ the entire story. Now go read it then come back and we'll talk. Turning our Department of Justice into a Carl Rove Hit Machine isn't exactly what the founding fathers had in mind here Sparky.
Right now, the problem is that GW appointees have to tow the line and attack political enemies (ie. Democrats). And this is whether or not their local Prosecutor (who GW appointed) believes there is even a reason to go after the Democrat. This is just what Nixon did with using govt agencies, like the IRS, to go after political enemies.
Say what you want. No one ever claimed that Clinton used the Justice Dept to go after his enemies. In fact, congress set up the Ken Starr Chamber Inquisitions to go after him. We all know just how unsuccessful this power play was. Ken never got his man (or woman).
The current Admin of GW and Gonzo are more bent on keeping and retaining power at the cost of any American ideals of justice and fair play.
Hence...."your are the weakest link.....goodbye!"
He serves at the pleasure of the president. There doesn't have to be a reason, just hand me your resignation and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Posted by skyk at 07:44 AM : Mar 15, 2007
Right. When teh Whitewater investigation was heating up, Clinton wanted to get rif of the attorneys.....but he was told that would look too suspicious.
So, he got rid of all 90+ of them. Pretty elegant solution, I'd say. Only these intellectually dishonest numbnut libs think what Gonzales did was scandalous!!
Posted by US_Infidel
Check your facts. He didn't refuse to do the job. He checked it out and saw no cause to go farther.
So, he got rid of all 90+ of them. Pretty elegant solution, I'd say. Only these intellectually dishonest numbnut libs think what Gonzales did was scandalous!! "
Posted by US_Infidel
Can't you get any facts correct? The firings occurred early in the clinton administration. More closer in time to Rostenkowski problem then the Whitewater/ken Starr Inquisitions.
You know even a broken clock is right two times a day. Keep trying.
You know even a broken clock is right two times a day. Keep trying.
Posted by bigsk8fan
LMAO!!
Even a blind pig occasionaly finds an acorn!!
AND YOU AMEICANS WANT TO ELECT THE SAME OLD S/H/I/T/ NO MATTER WHO IS RUNNING ANYONE IN POLITICS AND THAT ANYONE HAS STICKY FINGERS SO WHY ARE AMERICANS GOING TO DO IT AGAIN. WE NEED SOMEONE NEW ALL NEW EVERY SEAT NEEDS NEW BLOOD, AND THAT BLOOD WOULD BE FOR AMERICA AND AMERICANS..
McKay has broken party ranks and must be smeared and punished.
"Processorr2" is not the same person as "processor2"
...
I think McKay looks like Clinton. He can't be trusted. He's probably having an afair on his wife.
Posted by bigsk8fan at 08:05 AM : Mar 15, 2007
Keep skating and spinning my man. YOUR facts are incorrect. Must be taking too many falls on your head without a helemt??
Upon taking office, in an YET UNEXPLAINED departure from the practice of recent administrations, Janet Reno911 suddenly fired all 90+ U.S. attorneys. She said the decision had been made, "in conjunction with the White House." Translation: The President ordered it.
The investigations were ALREADY under way in Arkansas. In fact, he had a protoge of his fire the Arkansas attorney general, as well.
The time frame is correct and your facts are wrong!
WAKE UP AMERICA
Clinton has silver hair. McKay has silver hair. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Clinton doesn't like Bush. Mckay doesn't like Bush. Coincidence? I don't think so.
McKay should have been more loyal to the party and the President. He got what he deserved.
IMPEACH ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES.
Posted by bigsk8fan at 07:58 AM : Mar 15, 2007
I see. And you get YOUR facts from MoveOver.org? The daily Koz??? Huffingtons??? Barbara Strisand??? Of course a democrat investigating democrats would find no cause.
Why else would William (Cold Cash) Jefferson (D-LA) still be getting high ranking appointments from Air Pelosi???
Republicans don't break the law. We have family values. Unlike you libs.
IMPEACH ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES.
At the time, Gonzales was an attorney with Vinson & Elkins, a massive Texas law firm that boasted Enron and Halliburton among its clientele, and Gonzales was ready to excel in the private realm.
Bud Cummins, a Republican U.S. Attorney from my state of Arkansas, who was one of those fired, told Dan Eggen of the Washington Post that he was surprised to find out that a Karl Rove protege was taking his job. This prompted the Justice Department to call him about his interview with the Post. Cummins then crafted an e-mail to his former colleagues, warning that the Justice Department would come after them if they, too, spoke out.
Along with shock, there is rage that Alberto Gonzales, with the White House's blessing, has tampered with the long-standing tradition of changing U.S. Attorneys only when an administration changes hands, unless a prosecutor engages in misconduct. To my knowledge that is certainly not the case with Cummins.
Every prosecutor fired, including John McKay, seems very competent. The truth is that they have ethics, and their desire to follow the rule of law stood in confrontation with the Bush Administration.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 90 Comments