Prosecutors Scandal E-Mails Reveal Sniping

Ex-White House Political Director Called One Attorney "Lazy"

(CBS)  By CBS News Justice Department reporter Stephanie Lambidakis

---

The latest batch of e-mails turned over to congressional investigators about the U.S. Attorney firings still doesn't answer the million-dollar question of who created the hit list. But they're filled with back-channel sniping and juicy new tidbits.

White House Political Director Sara Taylor, the most recent official to head out the administration's door, slams Arkansas U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins as "lazy... which is why we got rid of him in the first place." Taylor used a Republican National Committee e-mail account, "@gwb43.com" to bang out a furious e-mail about Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who is leaving this summer, for telling investigators behind closed doors that the White House was more involved than it admitted.

"Why would McNulty say this? This has been so poorly handled on the part o [sic] DOJ", Taylor complained to Gonzales' Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson, who quit in March.

There is also a tantalizing new clue from White House Counsel Harriet Miers, who resigned in January. In e-mail exchanges with her deputy after the controversy erupted, Miers strongly advised against trashing the reputations of the U.S. Attorneys, even though the counsel's office is "convinced the prosecutors have disloyally stirred up the senators."

"We can see what the Chief thinks," she cryptically declared.

Might she have asked the president for his opinion on how to handle the firings?

The release of the e-mails followed weeks of protracted negotiations between Capitol Hill and the Justice Department. Amid all the legal wrangling over what's privileged material, and what's not, the fight was also about keeping embarrassing — and snarky — private talk out of the public domain.

[sjc_1]

These guys have rewarded political friends long before Brownie and FEMA. This goes back to G.W.'s days at Yale when people that were on the "A" list were called "good men".

That means that they came from the correct families and would play ball. They would look the other way when they did some things that most people with conscience would object to.

[forthepeopl1]

ok we still dont have carl roves e-mails how come

[kaliveotin]

Everyone knows the firings were for "NOT going after democrats in political cases" or "going after Republicants caught up in payola and Fraud cases". For these to have all be coincidences would require astronomical odds. A Democratic scandal is when an official uses his political connections to "lose" $35,000 in a property developement debacle (Clinton) a Republican scandel is when a corrupt President and a corrupt Vice-President partner-up with a corrupt CEO of a large corporation, such as ENRON or HALLIBURTON to steal "Tens of Millions" of dollars from taxpayers (Halliburton) or Consumers (Enron).

[ramos937]

"We can see what the Chief thinks," she cryptically declared."

Miers had only one Boss ("Chief") - President Bush. She would have asked his opinion on the matter which would have ranged from (1) don't bother me on this. (2) you guys handle it, (3) if they are disloyal, get rid of them, (4) drop it, (5) whatever. Since this e mail has now appeared, it has to be cleared up otherwise, it will remain a festering wound. This is the last thing Bush needed.

[reel-crazy]

"the fight was also about keeping embarrassing %u2014 and snarky %u2014 private talk out of the public domain."

I am sure there is plenty of it, too...

[mudrose-2009]

"We can see what the Chief thinks," she cryptically declared."

Miers had only one Boss ("Chief") - President Bush. She would have asked his opinion on the matter which would have ranged from (1) don't bother me on this. (2) you guys handle it, (3) if they are disloyal, get rid of them, (4) drop it, (5) whatever. Since this e mail has now appeared, it has to be cleared up otherwise, it will remain a festering wound. This is the last thing Bush needed.

Posted by ramos937

Know what you mean but you can't hang someone on the phrase either. Could be see calls everyone Chief. What is this a witch hunt?

[sjc_1]

The reason that this is a big deal is that it is a crime to fire these people based on political motives. The law is very clear on this and since we are suppose to be a Rule of Law nation, that applies to the Executive Branch as well.

If sounds like they fired these people because they did not go after opposing political candidates. These people did not think that there was evidence to bring charges and Bush's people indicated that it did not matter.

[realpatriot1]

mudrose,

Nobody wants to hang anyone on a phrase. We just want her to do her duty as a citizen and testify.

She should be able to explain who the Chief is.

[prinzowhales]

Have they had access to the e-mails that the investigative reporter, Mr. Palance, has? If not, why not?

Have the supposedly "lost" e-mails been retrieved?

[p-syrus]

What is this a witch hunt?
Posted by mudrose at 09:03 AM

No, its an investigation conducted under the auspices of Congress' duty to conduct oversight over government operations. It is a major responsibility of the congress which curiously has been overlooked for the last, hmmm, about 6.5 years now.

Now that congress is actually paying attention to what the government is up to it has become clear there has been an effort on the part of Bush Administration Officials to politicize the department of justice. This is clearly illegal under existing law as well as clearly established (notice Monica Gooding's immunity deal).

So, just to recap, it has been established: there is a problem at the department of justice that involves violation of the nations laws in order to use the power of the attorney general for purposes of political partisanship.

What is being done now, is to establish the full nature of the problem and also who exactly is responsible for corruption of the department of justice and violation of the law.

When the investigation is concluded ... .

[abbe7]

Senator Leahy reacted this way:

That bill, the Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007, has been on the president%u2019s desk since June 4th. Do you know it seems he just can%u2019t bring himself to sign it? Instead, we were informed yesterday through the Justice Department that the attorney general has used the power that we voted to repeal again.

It%u2019s almost like they live in an alternate world, as though they%u2019re not realizing the reaction of Democrats and Republicans about this misuse of this power. That%u2019s wrong.

June 14, 2007%u2014Late Thursday night, The White House released this two-line statement:

On June 14, 2007, the President signed into law:

S. 214, the %u201CPreserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007.%u201D

[abbe7]

June 4, 2007%u2014Congress sends S.214, the Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007, to President Bush for his signature. Bush takes no immediate action.

June 13, 2007%u2014Senate Judiciary Chair Patrick Leahy (D-VT) is notified by DoJ that Acting US Attorney for the Central District of California, George Cardona, will be appointed to the post on an interim basis by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales using the authority granted under the 2006 USA Patriot Act. Cardona will be able to serve indefinitely without Senate scrutiny. (The Central District was run by Debra Wong Yang until she resigned last October. Yang had been leading an investigation into %u201Clucrative ties%u201D between a lobbying firm and Republican Representative Jerry Lewis, and is believed to have been targeted for ouster by White House Counsel Harriet Miers.)