by D. Cupples | It can't be stressed too much: the Justice Department is not supposed to set that prosecutorial dogs loose on us citizens -- or even muzzle the dogs -- based on political agendas.
And yet, since Congress began investigating Justice Department politicization (after the unprecedented firing of 9 U.S. Attorneys), evidence has continually trickled out that political agendas played a part in our Justice Department's decision making. McClatchy's Washington Bureau reports:
"The Justice Department delayed prosecuting a key Republican official for jamming the phones of New Hampshire Democrats until after the 2004 election, protecting top GOP officials from the scandal until the voting was over.
"An official with detailed knowledge of the investigation into the 2002 Election-Day scheme said the inquiry sputtered for months after a prosecutor sought approval to indict James Tobin, the northeast regional coordinator for the Republican National Committee.
"The phone-jamming operation was aimed at preventing New Hampshire Democrats from rounding up voters in the close U.S. Senate race between Republican Rep. John Sununu and Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen. Sununu's 19,000-vote victory helped the GOP regain control of the Senate....
"A Manchester, N.H., policeman quickly traced the jamming to Republican political operatives in 2003 and forwarded the evidence to the Justice Department for what ordinarily would be a straightforward case.
"However, the official, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, told McClatchy that senior Justice Department officials slowed the inquiry....
"Paul Twomey, a lawyer for the state Democratic Party, said the delay spared Republicans embarrassment at the peak of the campaign because a pending deposition would have revealed that several state GOP officials knew about the scheme, which was hatched by their executive director, Charles McGee. The delay also stalled the case beyond its statute of limitations, depriving Democrats of full discovery, he said." (see McClatchy for case details.)
A Department of Justice (DoJ) policy manual called "The Red Book" does advise against bringing election-fraud cases just before an election, to avoid unfair influence on elections. Apparently, DoJ officials followed that policy selectively. (BN-Politics-1)
During a congressional hearing in June, for example, we learned that former DoJ Civil Rights Division head Bradley Schlozman had insisted on bringing a small election-fraud case in Missouri (a Republican battleground state) just before Election 2006. A Democrat-leaning group told the DoJ that four workers had registered some ineligible voters.
Under Red Book policy, the DoJ should have delayed the case until after the November election. As Interim US Attorney in Missouri, Schlozman aggressively pursued the case days before the election, enabling Missouri Republican party officials to use the indictments in campaign literature. (Washington Post).
Schlozman did admit to Congress that waiting a few weeks likely would not have affected the Missouri case. After denials from DoJ officials whom Schlozman had blamed for his decision to violate Red Book policy, Schlozman retroactively edited his congressional testimony. (BN-Politics-2)
Another case involved Minnesota's Republican Secretary of state, whose rule-interpretation prohibited some Native Americans from using tribal photo-ID's to vote. Concerned that this would stop many Native Americans from voting (they tend to vote Democrat), then-U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger tried to get Schlozman's approval to open an investigation. Schlozman opted to handle the issue quietly before the election. Heffelfinger ended up on the to-be-fired list.
None of this is absolute proof of Justice Department politicization, but it should send eyebrows straight up to the hairline.
Memeorandum has other bloggers' comments: Blue Girl, Red State, Prairie Weather and Blue Hampshire
Related BN-Politics Posts:
* Justice Dept. Avoids Hearing on Contractor Rape Case
* Stories Coming about Selective Prosecution of Siegelman?
* Justice Department: Weapon Against Political Enemies?
* Republican ex-AG Thinks DoJ Selectively Prosecuted
* DoJ's Goodling Admits Administration "Caged" Votes in 2004
* How Just is our Justice Department? Ask ex-USA Charlton
* Gonzales Resigns, Facing Perjury Investigation
* Another U.S. Attorney Targeted for Political Reasons?
* Fired U.S. Attorney Scandal Overview
Comments