Wednesday, March 14th, 2007...6:26 am
Me? I Don’t Know What Is Going on Either.
With all of the national media attention to the US Attorney scandal (has anyone come up with a snappy name for this yet? Prosecutor Purge?), there hasn’t been a great deal of attention to our own US Attorney’s office.
This may be because the cases in Arkansas and New Mexico have been so blatantly dirty; the politics of the firing of US Attorney Paul Charlton are muddier.
In the stack of e-mails that were revealed yesterday, Jon Kyl is quoted as being fine with Charlton’s sacking. In an article published in the Republic this morning, Kyl disputes this.
The Justice Department not only claims that Kyl was fine with the firing, but:
A detailed memo from Justice officials to the White House lists Kyl as a key Republican the administration needed to inform about the purge and solicit for recommendations on replacements as well as to help weather a possible political storm over the moves.
Despite this, the administration didn’t seem to listen to Kyl on the replacement for Charlton. One may remember that Kyl and John McCain recommended Diane Humetewa, a former McCain staffer with eight years of experience with the US Attorney’s office. It seems odd for the administration to blow off the recommendation of both of a state’s senators, especially when they are of the same party, one is a member of the judiciary committee and the other is, well, John McCain. Humetewa was passed over and Dan Knauss, a career federal prosecutor from Tucson, has been appointed instead.
It would be hard to classify Knauss, who has been in the office for decades, as a “political hack.” But some in the legal community wonder if he is an interim while the administration looks for a candidate closer to their percieved needs. Some are asking whether Knauss would be willing to pursue politically difficult cases if he believes his posting is so tenuous.
There were some other interesting things that came up in the e-mails this morning. The funny part is, neither the reason that paranoids like me posited (to kibosh the Rick Renzi investigation), or the reason originally given by the administration (Charlton’s supposed “softness” on the death penalty) are mentioned. The e-mails claim that Charlton didn’t prosecute a particular obscenity case and wasn’t aggressive enough on marijuana smugglers. I have a feeling that they were hunting for reasons and they came up with these. I would hope that with all of the problems facing federal prosecutors in Arizona that the administration’s priority was not the prosecution of a single obscenity case.
9 Comments
March 14th, 2007 at 7:03 am
The “Hourly Update” section of the Star’s on-line Mobile Edition has a story saying Dennis Hastert was the first to urge the firing of Charlton because he only prosecuted big drug cases. I tend to agree with you that Kyl played a role, too.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:01 am
What is more interesting here is that he did not back Charlton, the guy he originally put up and he is now trying to weasle out of it. He turned against a good Republican prosecutor who had a fantastic reputation and who impressed many in the justice system. He was a good, loyal, Arizonan and instead of backing him, the backed the administration.
There is another angle to this that no one has brought up yet. What about McCain? What has McCain had to say about this?
Remember this. President’s appoint prosecutors and judges upon the recommendation of home state Senators of the same party. They are then traditionally confirmed with the backing of those same home-state Senators.
What is disturbing and that must be answered is this:
Why did neither McCain or Kyl go to bat for him when he was fired and members of our justice system were outraged?
Why did it take so damned long, since this story made the pages in mid February for Kyl to say ANYTHING and why has McCain still said little to nothing?
Aren’t they supposed to represent Arizona and the needs of our state? It appears that backing a prosecutor with a stellar record in the face of political reasons for firing would be that very sense of representation.
Finally, other Republicans are outraged at this and understandably. Why not our Senators???
March 14th, 2007 at 11:37 am
You Liberals make me laugh. You all make a huge thing out of nothing. Where you all you when Janet L. Reno, Bill Clinton’s Attorney General, fired all 93 US Attorneys. Your all a bunch of HYPOCRITES!!!
Link: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n16_v50/ai_21123146
March 14th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
We liberals don’t have this one wrong at all. It is commonplace for entering Presidents to fire the last President’s Att. Gens. Bush did it to Clintons, Clinton did it to Bush I’s, Bush I to some degree even did it to Reagan’s choices.
What is quite different here is that it was DURING a term, that the individuals fired were fired for very political reasons, and that they were Republicans firing Republicans for no real reason. Worst of all, if you have been reading the stories and even the comments of Republican Senators and House members, this was done in an attempt to influence a decision that is supposed to be made on the basis of law, and not political interference.
You conservatives should understand that more than anything, as you frequently argue that legal decisions should be made on the basis of law and not political pressure or cronyism.
I will say this…this is a big enough of a deal that I heard the Republican minority chair of the House Judiciary incensed over the fact that the administration did this…and lied to Congress…more than once. Also, Sensenbrenner is incensed as are Cornyn, and a host of others.
These conservatives are seeing the light…maybe a little late for my taste, but they are seeing it.
I would like to see Kyl and McCain finally put up on this the way that they should. Kly is clearly involved and approved the firing for no real reason. McCain is still unaccounted for.
Again, this is pretty bad politics at the best (dont offend your base and the local republicans in a state where they were fired) and a scandal at its worse (DOJ sending over prosecutors to answer Congressmen and clearly lying to them).
So TonyGOPrano I do hope this helps. I also hope you will join many of the members of your party who are angry about this. I also hope you will show a little loyalty to a great public servant like Paul Charlton, who was railroaded out of office by folks in Washington who don’t seem to know what Arizona is all about.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Ok, this is all fine and good. But could we dial it down a notch and go local: by that I mean can someone please tell me who the Elias aid is/was who “attacked” that teenage girl?
March 15th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
Re: A Snappy Name
“With all of the national media attention to the
US Attorney scandal (has anyone come up with
a snappy name for this yet? Prosecutor Purge?)”
My DH has come up with the perfect name:
Gonzo Gate.
M.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Ha Ha “Gonzo Gate.” What’s a DH?
March 17th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
“DH” stands for ‘dear husband’
M.
March 26th, 2007 at 7:17 am
[…] this blog has adopted the name “Gonzo-Gate.” R-Cubed reader Mercedes came up with it. Yes, it’s got “-gate” at the end of it, but it has alliteration. It also serves […]
Leave a Reply