Schumer's Ethics Issues Getting Attention
By RS Insider Posted in Chuck Schumer | Congress | Culture of Corruption — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The RS Insider thinks the Democrats are going to be very careful about how they push on this US Attorney story. They already know that the administration is on firm ground on the firings themselves. Nobody argues that it’s illegal to replace US Attorneys, and no Democrat wants to be the one to argue for ignoring voter fraud and illegal immigration. Besides, as Patterico has ably demonstrated, the actual emails released clearly support the “idea that U.S. Attorneys were pushed out largely for legitimate reasons relating to the performance of the USAs in question”.
The RS Insider is also hearing that the Schumer/DSCC story has enough legs to make the Democrats uneasy about pursuing this story for political advantage, too – especially against Senator Domenici. Over at Townhall, Rich Galen points out the Democrats big problem:
Read on . . .
Just to make clear just how MUCH partisan politics is involved in this: Chuck Schumer (chair of the DSCC) is seventh in seniority of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He asked for, and was granted permission to, chair a hearing involving Senator Pete Domenici (about which, more later). Barbara Boxer, in addition to being the deputy chair of the DSCC is also the chair of the Senate Ethics Committee and wants to open an investigation.
Partisan politics? Never heard of it.
Push this too hard and the media is going to start asking themselves who it was that was being accused of pushing investigations for campaign purposes. (hint: not the Republicans) Congressional Quarterly is already there…
The day after Sen. Charles E. Schumer took testimony from a fired U.S. attorney about a call from Sen. Pete V. Domenici, R-N.M., the campaign committee Schumer directs used it to blast Domenici, who is up for re-election in 2008. … As chairman of the campaign operation and of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts, Schumer, D-N.Y., appears to be filling the roles of both congressional investigator and political attack dog.
The RS Insider remembers both the press and the public turning on Republicans when the Republicans took investigations too far during President Clinton’s term. Eventually, even the media will recognize the difference between prudent oversight and campaign fundraising scandal-mongering. The RS Insider thinks the Democrats are crossing that line.
« BREAKING: Bank Collapses. Feds cite Sen. Chuck Schumer as "immediate cause" of collapse — Comments (14) | Chuck Schumer Using Taxpayer Money to Raise Money for DSCC — Comments (20) »
Schumer's Ethics Issues Getting Attention 8 Comments (0 topical, 8 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
On FNS, RHINO Arlen Spector acknowledged to Chris Wallace that Sen Schumer was committing a conflict of interest with his dual roles on the Senate Judiciary Committee and as chairman of the DSCC. Which was certainly a surprise coming from the likes of Spector. When asked if he was prepared to bring charges before the committee, he said no but that he spoke with Schumer and asked him to do the right thing. Schumer do the right thing???
Last fall during the elections, Schumer, thru one of his underlings, illegally obtained certain finance records of MD republican Senate candidate William Steele. Was any action asked for by republicans or taken by the Justice Dept? NO!
Unfortunately, there is a rather long, and growing, list of Democratic misdeeds, legal and ethical dating back to “Bagdad Jim McDermott” and his releasing an illegally taped phone conversation between Newt Gingrich and John Boehner to the NYT. McDermott was then a member of the House Ethics Committee. Was anything ever done to bring charges or investigate his actions. NO!
Last week, in sworn testimony before Rep Waxman’s republican “head-hunting” committee, Valerie Plame stated she had nothing to do with getting her husband the assignment to Niger. Her statement directly contradicts the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Did any republican raise the possibility of her lying to Congress under oath? NONE TO DATE? Although there has been some concern coming from the Senate committee. HOWEVER, DON’T LOOK FOR REPUBLICANS TO PRESS FOR AN INVESTIGATION!!!
The republicans in Congress and the Bush Administration have become a collection of self-interest wimps, and a major disappointment to their constituency. Where are the bomb throwers to challenge the likes of Schumer, Kennedy, Reid, Durbin, Pelosi, Murtha, etc? Where, where, where is the forceful leadership in the republican party willing the defend their policies and challenge the democrats on their ethics and socialistic policies? I am waiting, but not holding my breath.
no Democrat wants to be the one to argue for ignoring voter fraud and illegal immigration
That office [referring to Mrs. Lam’s office], is presently committing fully half of its Assistant U.S. Attorneys to prosecute criminal immigration cases. Prosecutions for alien smuggling in the Southern District under USC sections 1234 are rising sharply in Fiscal Year 2006. As of March 2006, the halfway point in the fiscal year, there were 342 alien smuggling cases filed in that jurisdiction. This compares favorable with the 484 alien smuggling prosecutions brought there during the entirety of Fiscal Year 2005.
not true
Nobody argues that it’s illegal to replace US Attorneys
because I'll argue that it is illegal to obstruct justice and if an United States attorney was fired to prevent or distort an investigation then a crime has been committed.
Note: I'm definitely NOT claiming that there was any attempt to obstruct justice here, however, there is certainly some pause for concern. Mostly because the Bush Administration and the DOJ senior staff have clearly bungled what should have been a straight forward process and have created a mess that could have been easily avoided.
Unfortunately, several of the USAs fired were involved in investigations where it is possible to make a circumstantial claim that someone was trying to obstruct justice. That will provide the Dems with plenty of cover to dig deeply into the DOJ and stave off the charge of over reaching... at least for awhile.
Seeing as they fired the USA that was investigating them.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
The other side is entitled to whatever it takes to win, because for them winning is the goal. Conservatives are limited because the goal is a better society.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
An investigation of something (anything) and the decision to file charges or a case, are, for the most part, acts of prosecutorial discretion.
That discretion rests with the ultimate arbiter. In a locality it's the DA (not an Assistant DA, not even an Executive Assistant like Jack McCoy). In a state, it's the AG (sometimes the Governor, where the Governor has direct authority over the AG). At the federal level it is the USAG and the President. US Attorneys are simply deputies of the Attorney General and the Jutice Department. If the AG says stop investigating, they stop. If he says start investigating, they start.
The idea of a discretionary decision leading to obstruction of justice charges is ludicrous. The justice system cannot, by definition, obstruct itself. Special prosecutors like Fitzmas, exist to "solve" the "problem" of politics getting mixed up in seeking justice. To the extent the Justice Department and/or White House cannot be expected to impartially review a matter, a special prosecutor can be requested and appointed acting independently of the traditional chain of command that a US Attorney functions under.
So, no Virginia, there is no obstuction here.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777