In a scathing op-ed last week, John Koppel -- a 26-year Justice Department attorney -- discussed the Bush Administration's "disrespect" for law and ethics, particularly regarding the Justice Department. Koppel still works for Justice (at least he did last week), meaning he took risks when speaking out. In part, he wrote:
"The unconscionable commutation of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's sentence, the misuse of warrantless investigative powers under the Patriot Act and the deplorable treatment of U.S. attorneys all point to an unmistakable pattern of abuse....
[The Bush Administration] "has systematically undermined the rule of law in the name of fighting terrorism, and it has sought to insulate its actions from legislative or judicial scrutiny and accountability by invoking national security at every turn, engaging in persistent fearmongering, routinely impugning the integrity and/or patriotism of its critics, and protecting its own lawbreakers…. (Denver Post)
Between 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, many Americans refrained from criticizing the Administration for fear of having "terrorist sympathizer" burned into their foreheads. It reminded me of what former Nazi supporter Martin Niemoeller said about the Nazis:
"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”
Apparently, Justice employees have been afraid to speak out about injustice for some time. For example,
former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton told Congress two weeks ago that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had pushed him to seek the death penalty in a murder case that lacked sufficient evidence (i.e., no body, no weapon, no DNA). Charlton had asked Gonzales for funds to search for the body, which could have made or broken the case. Gonzales refused yet kept pushing for the death penalty.
What sort of law enforcement official -- what sort of man -- seeks to kill another without being certain of guilt?
Charlton was one of the fired U.S. Attorneys, and he spoke out after the Administration indirectly smeared his reputation by claiming that all U.S. Attorneys had been fired based on their (poor) performance. What if the Administration had made different statements about the firings?
Are there other U.S. Attorneys who still have their jobs and are not speaking out about apparent injustices? If so, what other horrifying things will we learn, assuming the Bush Administration fails to shut down Congress' investigations?
Another example of untimely honesty: yesterday, two senior Justice Department officials said that they had informed Gonzales that the FBI violated laws when tapping into Americans' communications (e.g., mail, emails and phone calls). In 2005, Gonzales told Congress "'There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse' after 2001" (Washington Post).
Better late than never, absolutely, but why didn't those Justice officials speak out set the record straight two years ago?
That the Justice Department kept a lid on so much for so long is precisely why Congress should be allowed to continue its investigations without obstruction from the Bush Administration. We taxpayers deserve to know how our money is being (and has been) spent.
Comments