Inspector General's Report On DOJ Firing Scandal
The Office of the Inspector General has released its final report on the removal of nine U.S. attorneys from the Department of Justice.
The 392-page report can be downloaded here.
This morning, the New York Times reported:
[O]fficials with knowledge of the inspector general's investigation and defense lawyers who have been involved in it said they did not expect that the investigation would recommend that criminal charges be pursued at this point against Mr. Gonzales or other officials. The report was expected to recommend that investigators continue to pursue some elements of the case, meaning that the legal questions around Mr. Gonzales would continue.
Enjoy your hard working tax dollars.
An Investigation into the Removal of Nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006 (.pdf) [DOJ]
No Charges Expected in Dismissal of Attorneys [New York Times]
(10) Comments
Posted in: Department of Justice, Monica Goodling
third
DPOG
Gonzalez may not recall, but I do - Lat is/was funnier than Mystal.
Way to phone it in, MysTTTal.
They need to go to "federal pound me in the ass prison"
Damnit Elie, it's "inspector's general."
How about reading the report and blueboxing some juicy tidbits instead of just throwing up a link?
have they disbarred goodling yet?
Oh no criminal charges?? OH my, maybe that's because nothing criminal occurred dumbasses! This whole thing was nonsense, Clinton/Reno fired ALL the AUSA's for political purposes, this was a media creation, like how the fact that no criminal charges are going to be filed is another extension of the story as if there was any plausible reason that they might. Such a joke!
I believe that Clinton/Reno did any firing at the beginning of Clinton's term. I think that this practice has been accepted for a long time. (Whatever the specifics, I think Clinton/Reno followed long-accepted practice.
What the Bush/Cheney/Gonzales team is accused of doing is using firings during the term to influence the legal judgments and investigations of AUSAs. I think even 9 can see the difference. We still don't know if this undue influence can be proven, but it's a very different accusation. Why shouldn't there be an investigation?