• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: Department of Justice

The Special Counsel always rings twice

18 Friday Nov 2022

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Department of Justice, Donald Trump, Insurrection, Merrick Garland, national security, special counsel

…The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification ofthe Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021 , as well as any matters that arose or might arise directly from this investigation or that are within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). This authorization does not apply to prosecutions that are currently pending in the District of Columbia, as well as future investigations and prosecutions of individuals for offenses they committed while physically present on the Capitol grounds on January 6, 2021. Those investigations and prosecutions remain under the authority of the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Further delineation ofthe authorizations between the Special Counsel and
the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia will be provided as necessary and appropriate…

…The Special Counsel is further authorized to conduct the ongoing investigation referenced and described in the United States’ Response to Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional Relief, Donald J Trump v. United States, No. 9:22-CV-81294-AMC (S.D. Fla. Aug. 30, 2022) (ECF No. 48 at 5- 13), as well as any matters that arose or may arise directly from this investigation or that are within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)…

USAG111822Order5559-2022

Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…

Today at the Department of Justice:

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, November 18, 2022

Appointment of a Special Counsel

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland announced today the appointment of former career Justice Department prosecutor and former chief prosecutor for the special court in The Hague, Jack Smith, to serve as Special Counsel to oversee two ongoing criminal investigations. The first is the investigation, as described in court filings in the District of Columbia, into whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021. The second is the ongoing investigation involving classified documents and other presidential records, as well as the possible obstruction of that investigation, referenced and described in court filings submitted in a pending matter in the Southern District of Florida.

“Based on recent developments, including the former President’s announcement that he is a candidate for President in the next election, and the sitting President’s stated intention to be a candidate as well, I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint a special counsel,” said Attorney General Garland. “Such an appointment underscores the Department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters. It also allows prosecutors and agents to continue their work expeditiously, and to make decisions indisputably guided only by the facts and the law.”

The Attorney General also stated, “Although the Special Counsel will not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the Department, he must comply with the regulations, procedures, and policies of the Department. I will ensure that the Special Counsel receives the resources to conduct this work quickly and completely. Given the work done to date and Mr. Smith’s prosecutorial experience, I am confident that this appointment will not slow the completion of these investigations. The men and women who are pursuing these investigations are conducting themselves in accordance with the highest standards of professionalism. I could not be prouder of them. I strongly believe that the normal processes of this Department can handle all investigations with integrity. And I also believe that appointing a Special Counsel at this time is the right thing to do. The extraordinary circumstances presented here demand it. Mr. Smith is the right choice to complete these matters in an even-handed and urgent manner.”

Special Counsel Smith has resigned as the chief prosecutor for the special court in The Hague charged with investigating and adjudicating war crimes in Kosovo.

Attachment(s): Download 2022.11.18_order_5559-2022.pdf
Component(s): Office of the Attorney General
Press Release Number: 22-1237
Updated November 18, 2022

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Delivers Remarks on the Appointment of a Special Counsel (November 18, 2022)

Statement of Special Counsel Jack Smith (November 18, 2022)

“…You know, there’s something about this that’s like… well, it’s like you’re expecting a letter that you’re just crazy to get, and you hang around the front door for fear you might not hear him ring. You never realize that he always rings twice….”

Did someone say, “seditious conspiracy?”

13 Thursday Jan 2022

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Capitol breach, Department of Justice, indictments, Insurrection, right wingnuts, sedition, seditious conspiracy

Today:

National Security Division, U.S. Dept of Justice @DOJNatSec
Leader of Oath Keepers and 10 Other Individuals Indicted in Federal Court for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach

Eight Others Facing Charges in Two Related Cases
[….]
12:38 PM · Jan 13, 2022

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, January 13, 2022

Leader of Oath Keepers and 10 Other Individuals Indicted in Federal Court for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach

Eight Others Facing Charges in Two Related Cases

A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned an indictment yesterday, which was unsealed today, charging 11 defendants with seditious conspiracy and other charges for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, which disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress that was in the process of ascertaining and counting the electoral votes related to the presidential election.

According to court documents, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, 56, of Granbury, Texas, who is the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers; and Edward Vallejo, 63, of Phoenix, Arizona, are being charged for the first time in connection with events leading up to and including Jan. 6. Rhodes was arrested this morning in Little Elm, Texas, and Vallejo was arrested this morning in Phoenix.

In addition to Rhodes and Vallejo, those named in the indictment include nine previously charged defendants: Thomas Caldwell, 67, of Berryville, Virginia; Joseph Hackett, 51, of Sarasota, Florida; Kenneth Harrelson, 41, of Titusville, Florida; Joshua James, 34, of Arab, Alabama; Kelly Meggs, 52, of Dunnellon, Florida; Roberto Minuta, 37, of Prosper, Texas; David Moerschel, 44, of Punta Gorda, Florida; Brian Ulrich, 44, of Guyton, Georgia and Jessica Watkins, 39, of Woodstock, Ohio. In addition to the earlier charges filed against them, they now face additional counts for seditious conspiracy and other offenses.

Eight other individuals affiliated with the Oath Keepers, all previously charged in the investigation, remain as defendants in two related cases. All defendants – except Rhodes and Vallejo – previously were charged in a superseding indictment. The superseding indictment has now effectively been split into three parts: the 11-defendant seditious conspiracy case, a seven-defendant original case, and a third case against one of the previously charged defendants.

In one of the related cases, the original superseding indictment, charges remain pending against James Beeks, 49, of Orlando, Florida; Donovan Crowl, 51, of Cable, Ohio; William Isaacs, 22, of Kissimmee, Florida; Connie Meggs, 60, of Dunnellon, Florida; Sandra Parker, 63, of Morrow, Ohio; Bernie Parker, 71, of Morrow, Ohio, and Laura Steele, 53, of Thomasville, North Carolina. The other case charges Jonathan Walden, 57, of Birmingham, Alabama.

The three indictments collectively charge all 19 defendants with corruptly obstructing an official proceeding. Eighteen of the 19 defendants – the exception is Walden – are charged with conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiring to prevent an officer of the United States from discharging a duty. Eleven of the 19 defendants are charged with seditious conspiracy. Some of the defendants are also facing other related charges.

As alleged in the indictments, the Oath Keepers are a large but loosely organized collection of individuals, some of whom are associated with militias. Though the Oath Keepers will accept anyone as members, they explicitly focus on recruiting current and former military, law enforcement and first-responder personnel. Members and affiliates of the Oath Keepers were among the individuals and groups who forcibly entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

The seditious conspiracy indictment alleges that, following the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election, Rhodes conspired with his co-defendants and others to oppose by force the execution of the laws governing the transfer of presidential power by Jan. 20, 2021. Beginning in late December 2020, via encrypted and private communications applications, Rhodes and various co-conspirators coordinated and planned to travel to Washington, D.C., on or around Jan. 6, 2021, the date of the certification of the electoral college vote, the indictment alleges. Rhodes and several co-conspirators made plans to bring weapons to the area to support the operation. The co-conspirators then traveled across the country to the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area in early January 2021.

According to the seditious conspiracy indictment, the defendants conspired through a variety of manners and means, including: organizing into teams that were prepared and willing to use force and to transport firearms and ammunition into Washington, D.C.; recruiting members and affiliates to participate in the conspiracy; organizing trainings to teach and learn paramilitary combat tactics; bringing and contributing paramilitary gear, weapons and supplies – including knives, batons, camouflaged combat uniforms, tactical vests with plates, helmets, eye protection and radio equipment – to the Capitol grounds; breaching and attempting to take control of the Capitol grounds and building on Jan. 6, 2021, in an effort to prevent, hinder and delay the certification of the electoral college vote; using force against law enforcement officers while inside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021; continuing to plot, after Jan. 6, 2021, to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power, and using websites, social media, text messaging and encrypted messaging applications to communicate with co-conspirators and others.

On Jan. 6, 2021, a large crowd began to gather outside the Capitol perimeter as the Joint Session of Congress got under way at 1 p.m. Crowd members eventually forced their way through, up and over U.S. Capitol Police barricades and advanced to the building’s exterior façade. Shortly after 2 p.m., crowd members forced entry into the Capitol by breaking windows, ramming open doors, and assaulting Capitol police and other law enforcement officers. At about this time, according to the indictment, Rhodes entered the restricted area of the Capitol grounds and directed his followers to meet him at the Capitol.

At approximately 2:30 p.m., as detailed in the indictment, Hackett, Harrelson, Meggs, Moerschel and Watkins, and other Oath Keepers and affiliates – many wearing paramilitary clothing and patches with the Oath Keepers name, logo, and insignia – marched in a “stack” formation up the east steps of the Capitol, joined a mob, and made their way into the Capitol. Later, another group of Oath Keepers and associates, including James, Minuta, and Ulrich, formed a second “stack” and breached the Capitol grounds, marching from the west side to the east side of the Capitol building and up the east stairs and into the building.

While certain Oath Keepers members and affiliates breached the Capitol grounds and building, others remained stationed just outside of the city in quick reaction force (QRF) teams. According to the indictment, the QRF teams were prepared to rapidly transport firearms and other weapons into Washington, D.C., in support of operations aimed at using force to stop the lawful transfer of presidential power. The indictment alleges that the teams were coordinated, in part, by Caldwell and Vallejo.

The charge of seditious conspiracy carries a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

This case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. Valuable assistance was provided by U.S. Attorney’s Offices in the Northern District of Texas and the District of Arizona.

The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office with valuable assistance provided by the FBI’s Dallas and Phoenix Field Offices. These charges are the result of significant cooperation between agents and staff across numerous FBI Field Offices, including those in Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Arizona, Alabama and Georgia, among other locations.

In the one year since Jan. 6, more than 725 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including over 225 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.

[….]

An indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Hey, Josh and Jason, raise a fist to that.

The most dangerous place…

06 Wednesday Oct 2021

Posted by Michael Bersin in Josh Hawley, social media, US Senate

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

asshat, Chris Hayes, Department of Justice, DoJ, Fascist pig, Josh Hawley, missouri, pearl clutching, right wingnut, School Boards, Threats, Twitter, Virginia

“The most dangerous place to stand in Washington D.C. is any place between Senator Josh Hawley and a live microphone” – Charles P. Pierce

Yesterday evening:

All In with Chris Hayes @allinwithchris
Hey @HawleyMO, just circling back to see if you saw the threats to school officials across the country. We made a montage for you in case you didn’t.
[….]
8:04 PM · Oct 5, 2021

Watch the video.

Some of the comments:

He’s taking this position when an out of stater charged with 260 counts of fraud, threatened Walmart pharmacists with execution & came to Hawley’s home turf to rant at the local school board meeting. [….]

It used to be that when someone’s perception of reality was this far off base he would get a trip in a special jacket so that he could not hurt himself. Now they just lie about where they live and get elected to office. [….]

Nurses in his state have to carry panic buttons. He doesn’t care.

Dude’s a traitor.

Help with with this. Is his the same Josh Hawley who called police and said he was being attacked when peaceful protestors walked in front of his house carrying signs earlier this year?

If you are expecting Hawley, or any member of the GOP, to suddenly start being intellectually honest, you will he waiting a loooong time.

@HawleyMO, we need your clarification in light of these threats. Do you support such conduct? For the record please!

If Josh took any interest in his home state, he’d know one of these “concerned parents” threatened a black admin with “something worse than lynching” this week. But he only cares about what his handlers say & his political ambitions.

Virginia!

Except the “MY” state should have been Virginia. Ain’t nobody in Missouri every seen him.

So embarrassing. I voted for Claire McCaskill.

so when a few people demonstrating with posters stood outside his house it was “harrassment”,but says the parents threatening the school board is ok?

Please find out how many days Josh Hawley has actually BEEN in Missouri since he was elected. Maybe he’s unaware of the real threats to individuals in Missouri since he lives in Virginia.

Good to know that Josh stands for law, order and tourism. The videos just show tourists at school board meetings.

I’m old enough to remember when Hawley was part of an insurrection.

Josh Hawley thinks this will get him elected President.

Well, there is a really low bar for his party’s nomination.

I can’t believe Hawley thinks he’s senatorial.

He does pompous ass really well.

He’s a jackass

That, too.

Josh Hawley isn’t being sincere about threats at school board meetings. The American people have SEEN the verifiable threats made to educators, in the parking lots & in their cars.
Josh, when someone says to them: “We know where you live & we’re coming for you!”
It’s a threat.

If only everyone in the world knew what a lying, disingenuous, piece of shit he was before he was elected.
Oh wait, we did. Yet there’s enough partisan idiots in Missouri to put him in a position of power. Good work dumbasses

If Josh Hawley clutched those pearls any harder, he’d turn them into diamonds

Hawley knows exactly what he is doing, get these right wingers amped up so that they get themselves arrested. Keep playing that dog whistle.

So out of line. He knows, he is just an opportunist.

Previously:

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) – town hall in Warrensburg – Press Q and A – August 17, 2017 (August 17, 2017)

What passes for a flatbed truck at “…Yale, I think, or Harvard, one of those, one of those fancy ones…” (August 16, 2018)

Josh Hawley (r): throwing shit against the wall to see if anything sticks (December 30, 2020)

Josh Hawley (r): ladders and rakes (December 30, 2020)

Ladder Climbing 101: by the book (December 31, 2020)

Burning bridges (December 31, 2020)

Sedition, sedition…sedition (January 2, 2021)

What it is, is sedition… (January 3, 2021)

If you can’t stand the heat, trample people on your way to a live mic (January 3, 2021)

Nothing much going on. Why do you ask? (January 3, 2021)

The third Senator from Virginia (January 5, 2021)

Fascist pig (January 6, 2021)

What hath Josh Hawley (r) wrought? (January 6, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): Dumbass (January 7, 2021)

Sedition is bad for business (January 11, 2021)

HCR 10 and HCR 11 (January 12, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): “I no mye misoori constitutents our reely stoopit.” (January 14, 2021)

Ignite (January 15, 2021)

Campaign Finance: Dayam (January 16, 2021)

Penrose on Politics: Taps Closed to Insurrectionists (January 17, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): Why not add “obstructionist asshole” to the list, it’s just one more thing, right? (January 21, 2021)

Penrose on Politics: Hawley’s Hallmark Moment (January 23, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): looking ahead to 2024 (January 23, 2021)

After 17 days of silence (January 24, 2021)

Yeah, but those seven Senators didn’t pump their fists at insurrectionists immediately before the breach of the Capitol (January 25, 2021)

A shooting star elbow drop from the ropes (January 28, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): you got your wish (January 31, 2021)

If Josh Hawley (r) steps in front of a microphone today we get six more weeks of sedition. (February 2, 2021)

On the wrong side of everything (February 3, 2021)

Penrose On Politics: Hawley’s Crybaby Tour (February 6, 2021)

You got that one right (February 8, 2021)

Senator “Raise My Fist in Sedition” (r) has an opinion (February 10, 2021)

Working on the galley proofs for that right wingnut welfare vanity press book? (February 10, 2021)

Penrose On Politics: Hawley’s Indifference (February 13, 2021)

Eric Greitens (r) is on line one… (February 13, 2021)

Penrose On Politics: Hawley’s Mail (February 20, 2021)

What is Josh Hawley’s (r) favorite whine? (February 23, 2021)

Again, we already knew that (February 26, 2021)

Offered without comment (March 2, 2021)

The people you pay $174,000.00 a year believe that all billionaires are in desperate need of their help and that you haven’t suffered enough (March 6, 2021)

Home every night (March 7, 2021)

Penrose On Politics: Huckster Hawley (March 13, 2021)

“They could never do more damage than you have already done.” (March 17, 2021)

Anybody see Josh Hawley (r)? (March 17, 2021)

SB 528: Wolverines! (March 24, 2021)

Long term memory loss (March 30, 2021)

A voice in the wilderness (March 31, 2021)

Secretly wants to join the “minutemen of the state” so he can wear a brown shirt (April 8, 2021)

Calling out ALEC? (April 12, 2021)

Slam dunk (April 13, 2021)

He forgot to raise a fist (April 15, 2021)

Offered without comment (April 15, 2021)

Uh… (April 20, 2021)

A low Bar (April 22, 2021)

Just because (April 22, 2021)

One of those fancy prosecutors (April 23, 2021)

The Gallagher of American politics, only without any of the humor, intelligence, or sophistication (April 26, 2021)

A grifter is only interested in taking your money, not at all in making any sense (May 1, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): “As seen on TV!” (May 6, 2021)

Participation trophy (May 7, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): an attempt at performance art (May 9, 2021)

“It read better in the original German.” (May 14, 2021)

Josh Hawley (r): This you? (May 22, 2021)

Doha? Never heard of it…. (August 15, 2021)

This you, Josh? (August 16, 2021)

That was then (August 26, 2021)

Why the faux outrage? MCI isn’t in Virginia. (September 22, 2021)

Struggling to be relevant (September 27, 2021)

Flop sweat (September 30, 2021)

Is this a great country, or what?

13 Sunday Jun 2021

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Department of Justice, social media, subpoena abuse, Twitter, Walter Shaub

Rule of law. Right.

This morning:

Walter Shaub @waltshaub
Turns out, nobody at the Justice Department knew about the immaculate subpoenas.
6:28 AM · Jun 13, 2021

“…I see nothing. I hear nothing. I know nothing…”

Today was not a good day to be a stooge or useful idiot for Vladimir Putin

16 Monday Jul 2018

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Collusion, Department of Justice, Donald Trump, Maria Butina, NRA, Putin, Russia, Treason

When it rains it pours.

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, July 16, 2018

Russian National Charged in Conspiracy to Act as an Agent of the Russian Federation Within the United States

A criminal complaint was unsealed today in the District of Columbia charging a Russian national with conspiracy to act as an agent of the Russian Federation within the United States without prior notification to the Attorney General.
The announcement was made by Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jessie K. Liu, and Nancy McNamara, Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office.
Maria Butina, 29, a Russian citizen residing in Washington D.C., was arrested on July 15, 2018, in Washington, D.C., and made her initial appearance this afternoon before Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. She was ordered held pending a hearing set for July 18, 2018.
According to the affidavit in support of the complaint, from as early as 2015 and continuing through at least February 2017, Butina worked at the direction of a high-level official in the Russian government who was previously a member of the legislature of the Russian Federation and later became a top official at the Russian Central Bank. This Russian official was sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control in April 2018.
The court filings detail the Russian official’s and Butina’s efforts for Butina to act as an agent of Russia inside the United States by developing relationships with U.S. persons and infiltrating organizations having influence in American politics, for the purpose of advancing the interests of the Russian Federation. The filings also describe certain actions taken by Butina to further this effort during multiple visits from Russia and, later, when she entered and resided in the United States on a student visa. The filings allege that she undertook her activities without officially disclosing the fact that she was acting as an agent of Russian government, as required by law.
The charges in criminal complaints are merely allegations and every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The maximum penalty for conspiracy is five years. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes. If convicted of any offense, a defendant’s sentence will be determined by the court based on the advisory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
The investigation into this matter was conducted by the FBI’s Washington Field Office. The case is being prosecuted by the National Security Section of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the National Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

There’s some very interesting stuff in the affidavit:

[….]
7. U.S. Person 1 is a United States citizen and an American political operative. BUTINA established contact with U.S. Person 1 in Moscow in or around 2013. U.S. person 1 worked with Butina to jointly arrange introductions to U.S. persons having influence in American politics, including an organization promoting gun rights (hereinafter “GUN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION”), for the purpose of advancing the agenda of the Russian Federation.
[….]

I can’t wait for the explanation from the “gun rights organization”.

Pass the popcorn.

Peter Kinder throws a snit and shows us just who he really is

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Department of Justice, Eric Holder, Ferguson, missouri, Peter Kinder, racism, republicans

By now most Missourians who are even remotely tuned into state politics have heard that Lt. Governor Peter Kinder was contending that his $86,000 salary was not enough to stave off penury. His proposed solution: a per diem allowance of $103 for each day he spends in Jefferson city doing – wait for it – essentially nothing. But, hey, who can blame him? His cohorts in the legislature not only get that exact per diem allowance, but make out like bandits with gobs of lobbyist swag that likely doesn’t come his way that often.  

Unfortunately for Kinder’s endangered quality of life, it seems his peers in the legislature either didn’t take his situation seriously or were unwilling to risk the ire of constituents who are managing to eke out a living on considerably less than $86,000.  There’ll be no per diem for Lt. Governor Kinder. As a consequence, I surmise that he might be in a bad mood. He’s facing abject poverty, after all.

And bad mood might be the only way to explain his latest news-making move. The Lt. Governor has decided to weigh in on the topic of racism and the Ferguson uproar. And what he had to say either demonstrates the type of displaced anger that leaves one making ill-considered remarks that one regrets later when emotional and mental equilibrium are restored, or it’s just racist, dim-witted dribble. Judge for yourself:

The lieutenant governor of Missouri says “there is more racism in the Justice Department” than in the St. Louis area, pointing the finger at President Obama and the Justice Department who, he says, often incited “the mob” in the wake of the shooting of Michael Brown back in August of 2014.

“The whole blow up of this protest movement was based on the lie that never happened of ‘hands up don’t shoot,'” Peter Kinder, the Lt. governor told NewsMaxTV’s Steve Malzberg Show Monday. “But it’s bad enough the protestors were behaving that way but we have a right to expect more from the attorney general, the head of the Justice Department of the United States, and the president of the United States. And instead what we got too often from them was incitement of the mob, and, uh, encouraging disorder in Ferguson and distributing the peaceable going-about of our lives in the greater St. Louis region.”

Kinder added President Obama and Eric Holder “took one side” following the death of Michael Brown. Asked why, he said the Justice Department was “staffed with radical, hard-left radical, leftists lawyers.”

He called the Justice Department under Holder, “not like any Justice Department in American history” and “Eric Holder is unlike any previous attorney general.”

“Many of them have spent most of their careers defending Black Panthers and other violent radicals,” he added. “

So the entire “blow up” was the result of a “lie”? Evidently, Kinder didn’t read or lacks the capacity to process the Department of Justice (DoJ) report on Ferguson policing and justice systems. Nor does he seem to understand what a mere spark can do to a field that’s ready to burn. But, just as the mayor of Ferguson claimed that the thorough DoJ investigative report doesn’t constitute “proof” of racial misbehavior, Kinder thinks that we can disregard the well-substantiated facts recounted in the report because “Eric Holder is “unlike any previous attorney general” – which is to say, he’s black and, hence, ipso facto, in cahoots with radicals whose legal careers have been limited to “defending Black Panthers and other violent radicals.”

Is this resentment feeding on resentment? A sad, resentful man appealing in turn to the white resentment that fuels so much of the right wing? Do you think maybe Kinder wants a little appreciation from the types who think that the state of race relations leans a little too much toward those damned “takers.” Do you think he might be trying to erase the memory of the ridicule he excited the last time he stuck his head up into the light and demanded poverty relief?

I wonder, though, do you think that if people had to supply supporting evidence for such absurd claims before anyone would report on it, they’d think twice about what they had to say? What is the correct label for someone who puts ugly, unsubstantiated libels into the public record? And fails to take it back, apologise, explain that he was in a funk, had a headache, whatever, when he’s called on it (not too stringently, admittedly) by the media?

I recollect the efforts of St. Louis Post-Dispatch writer Tony Messenger to avoid, in his own words, contributing to “this state’s political problems, rather than elevating the discourse” after the dust-up about hateful political rhetoric that occurred in the wake of Tom Schweich’s recent suicide. Specifically, he apologised for calling a State Senator Kurt Schaeffer a fool when, he said, it would have sufficed to point out that one of Schaeffer’s legislative efforts was foolish. His mea culpa, no matter how admirable, bothered me – I hope to have more to say about it in the future – because if discourse is to be elevated, all the participants have to agree about the height of the plane on which they are going to get together and discuss. Otherwise, those who insist on going alone to the most elevated level will have nothing do do except shout into the wind.

Peter Kinder has revealed himself as one of those people who experience uncontrollable vertigo when confronted with the ladder that leads to that higher space. They confuse ideological labels with facts, the expedient with the good, their own good with that of everyone. Such people can do lots of harm – and are doing so daily in the Republican-dominated U.S. Congress and statehouses across the country. Such behavior is demonstrably foolish. And we call those who act foolishly fools, among other things. The correct label for Peter Kinder is fool, among other things. No apology will be offered.    

Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel – Bush memos released

02 Monday Mar 2009

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Bush, Department of Justice, memoranda, Obama, Office of Legal Counsel

The Obama Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel released Bush era legal memoranda [all are pdf]:

Memorandum Regarding Status of Certain OLC Opinions Issued in the Aftermath of the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (01-15-2009)

Memorandum Regarding Constitutionality of Amending Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to Change the “Purpose” Standard for Searches (09-25-2001)

Memorandum Regarding Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities within the United States (10-23-2001)

Memorandum Regarding Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Provisions of the ABM Treaty (11-15-2001)

Memorandum Regarding the President’s Power as Commander in Chief to Transfer Captured Terrorists to the Control and Custody of Foreign Nations (03-13-2002)

Memorandum Regarding Swift Justice Authorization Act (04-08-2002)

Memorandum Regarding Determination of Enemy Belligerency and Military Detention (06-08-2002)

Memorandum Regarding Applicability of 18 U.S.C. § 4001(a) to Military Detention of United States Citizens (06-27-2002)

Memorandum Regarding October 23, 2001 OLC Opinion Addressing the Domestic Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities (10-06-2008)

Due to public interest in this matter, the Department of Justice is releasing these documents in an inaccessible format. Accessible versions will be posted as soon as possible. If you have a disability and the format of any material on the site interferes with your ability to access some information, please email the Department of Justice webmaster at webmaster@usdoj.gov. To enable us to respond in a manner that will be of most help to you, please indicate the nature of the accessibility problem, your preferred format (electronic format (ASCII, etc.), standard print, large print, etc.), the web address of the requested material, and your full contact information so we can reach you if questions arise while fulfilling your request…

Pass the popcorn.

Something rightwing this way came

15 Thursday Jan 2009

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Bradley J. Schlozman, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice, missouri, politicization, United States Attorney

Bradley Schlozman, one time U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Missouri and pursuer of vote fraud cases after the previous U.S. Attorney, Todd Graves, was sacked is the subject of a report on politicization in the Department of Justice which was released yesterday.

The Department of Justice still has information about him up on a web site [retrieved today]:

Bradley J. Schlozman

Bradley J. Schlozman was appointed to serve as the United States Attorney for the Western District of Missouri under an Attorney General Appointment on March 23, 2006.

Prior to assuming his current post, Mr. Schlozman served as the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division at the United States Department of Justice. In this capacity, Mr. Schlozman supervised all activities of the Civil Rights Division, which is comprised of over 700 employees, including 356 attorneys. The Civil Rights Division is responsible for enforcing federal civil rights statutes, including those statutes that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, sex, disability, religion, and national origin in education, employment, credit, housing, public accommodations and facilities, voting, and certain federally funded and conducted programs.

Mr. Schlozman served for five months as the Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division. Before that, he had served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General since May 2003, directly supervising the Criminal, Voting, Employment, and Special Litigation Sections of the Civil Rights Division. Mr. Schlozman began his service in the Bush Administration as Counsel to then-Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson…

This is quite interesting – from the United States Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility (released January 13, 2009):

An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring and Other Improper Personnel Actions in the Civil Rights Division [pdf]

The particulars are an appalling indictment of dubya’s Justice Department. Near the beginning of the report:

…We were unable to interview several former Civil Rights Division officials no longer employed at the Department who declined our request for interviews. For example, Bradley Schlozman, who served as DAAG, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and Acting AAG in the Division, declined our interview request through his counsel. In addition, J. Michael Wiggins, who also served as a Principal DAAG for the Civil Rights Division, and Hans von Spakovsky, former Counsel to the AAG, declined our requests to interview them as part of this investigation. Jason Torchinsky, former Counsel to the AAG, did not respond to our written request for an interview…

…In March 2006, Schlozman was appointed to serve as the U.S. Attorney in the Western District of Missouri on an interim basis. Rena Comisac succeeded Schlozman as the Division’s Principal DAAG.

Schlozman remained in the interim U.S. Attorney position for approximately 1 year, until the nomination and confirmation of a permanent U.S. Attorney (John F. Wood) in March 2007. Schlozman then returned to Washington and took a position in the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA). He resigned from the Department on August 17, 2007…

[emphasis added]

In a footnote the report quotes an e-mail:

…In addition, while interim U.S. Attorney in the Western District of Missouri, Schlozman wrote an e-mail to a friend, dated June 15, 2006, contrasting his job as U.S. Attorney with his position in the Civil Rights Division. He wrote:

It has been months since I felt the need to scream with a blood-curdling cry at some commie, partisan subordinate (i.e., most of the [Voting] section staff until recently). And I feel like the people I now work with are all complete professionals. What a weird change. Granted, these changes are nice in many respects, but bitchslapping a bunch of [Division] attorneys really did get the blood pumping and was even enjoyable once in a while. I think now it’s all Good Cop for folks there. I much preferred the role of Bad Cop. . . . But perhaps the Division will name an award for me or something. How about the Brad Schlozman Award for Most Effectively Breaking the Will of Liberal Partisan Bureaucrats. I would be happy to come back for the awards ceremony…

Apparently career attorneys were transferred based on improper criteria:

…Based on the results of our investigation, we concluded that Schlozman considered political and ideological affiliations in transferring three career attorneys out of the Appellate Section between June 2005 and December 2005.

We also found that Schlozman considered political and ideological affiliations in other personnel actions affecting career attorneys, such as case assignments and awards. Several section chiefs told us that Schlozman directed them not to assign important cases to attorneys he identified as liberal, and one section chief said he instructed her to nominate the conservative attorneys he had hired for awards…

…We concluded that Schlozman inappropriately considered political and ideological affiliations when he forced three career attorneys to transfer from the Appellate Section.

As noted above, Schlozman frequently criticized the attorney staff in the Appellate Section and talked of his plan, when he “came into power,” to move certain attorneys from the section to make room for “real Americans.” Based on our interviews and our review of numerous e-mails, we found that Schlozman used the term “real Americans” to refer to individuals with conservative political views. Appellate Section Chief Flynn also told us that Schlozman named Appellate Section Attorneys A, B, and C as among several in the section whom he considered to be “disloyal,” “not one of us,” “against us,” “not on the team,” or “treacherous” and whom he wanted to move out of the section. In particular, Schlozman told Flynn that he viewed Attorney A as a “political opponent” because she had worked in the front office of the Division during the Clinton administration. Flynn said Schlozman “[o]ften brought up Attorney A – and politics. Said when he obtained power, he would get her out…”

[emphasis added]

Several others in the Justice Department are cited in the report:

…We concluded that Acosta and Kim did not sufficiently supervise Schlozman. In light of indications they had about Schlozman’s conduct and judgment, they failed to ensure that Schlozman’s hiring and personnel decisions were based on proper considerations. In addition, Bradshaw and Wiggins both had knowledge of Schlozman’s improper consideration of political and ideological affiliations in hiring, and they also failed to take action to ensure that Schlozman’s hiring decisions were consistent with the law and Department policy…

The conclusion of the report is blunt (reproduced in its entirety here):

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Our investigation examined whether:

(1) the Civil Rights Division improperly used political or ideological affiliations in assessing applicants for career attorney positions, including hiring for both experienced attorneys and entry-level attorneys through the Honors Program;

(2) political or ideological affiliations resulted in other personnel actions that affected career attorneys in the Division, such as attorney transfers and attorney case assignments;

(3) the Division’s senior management exercised appropriate oversight of Schlozman’s actions in the hiring and treatment of career attorneys; and

(4) Schlozman made false statements in his testimony to Congress about these matters.

The evidence in our investigation showed that Schlozman, first as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General and subsequently as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General, considered political and ideological affiliations in hiring career attorneys and in other personnel actions affecting career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division. In doing so, he violated federal law – the Civil Service Reform Act – and Department policy that prohibit discrimination in federal employment based on political and ideological affiliations, and committed misconduct. The evidence also showed that Division managers failed to exercise sufficient oversight to ensure that Schlozman did not engage in inappropriate hiring and personnel practices. Moreover, Schlozman made false statements about whether he considered political and ideological affiliations when he gave sworn testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee and in his written responses to supplemental questions from the Committee.

Schlozman is no longer employed by the Department and, therefore, is not subject to disciplinary action by the Department. We recommend, however, that, if criminal prosecution is declined these findings be considered if Schlozman seeks federal employment in the future. We believe that his violations of the merit system principles set forth in the Civil Service Reform Act, federal regulations, and Department policy, and his subsequent false statements to Congress render him unsuitable for federal service.

We also recommend that the Department consider taking additional action in light of the findings in this report. According to a March 2008 memorandum from the Attorney General, beginning in the summer of 2007, new political employees at the Department are briefed on “Merit System Principles and Prohibited Personnel Practices” as part of their orientation process. In the memorandum, the Attorney General expressed a commitment to “ensur[e] that all serving political appointees are provided the same information” and that they must acknowledge that they understand the principles.

In addition to these positive steps already taken, we recommend that the Department regularly provide training on merit system principles and prohibited personnel practices in the Civil Service Reform Act, federal regulations, and Department policies to personnel with a role in hiring or supervising career employees. Most of the Department attorneys we interviewed who had a role in the hiring process told us they received no such training on the applicable laws, regulations, and Department policies regarding the consideration of political and ideological affiliations or other impermissible factors. Most also said they only had a general sense of what considerations were prohibited. We believe that training should be provided to employees when they enter supervisory positions and when they assume any hiring responsibilities. The Department should also provide periodic refresher training reinforcing the law regarding impermissible factors in hiring and personnel actions.

We also recommend that the Department consider issuing periodic statements to all employees about what constitutes prohibited personnel practices under federal law, regulations, and Department policy. These statements should affirm that the Department, as an employer, is committed to compliance with all laws, regulations, and policies. The Department should provide information to employees about how they can report violations and where they can seek redress.

In sum, our report found that Schlozman considered political and ideological affiliations when hiring and taking other personnel actions relating to career attorneys, in violation of Department policy and federal law, and his actions also constitute misconduct. We also believe he made false statements to Congress about his actions.

We believe that the Department should take action, including implementing our recommendations, to help ensure that such conduct does not occur in the future.

[emphasis added]

Wow, just wow. Go. Read the whole thing.

Maybe this is the start of the accountability moments that will be emanating from the last eight years of insanity.

Pass the popcorn.

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 827,454 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...