{"id":1400,"date":"2007-03-13T13:47:00","date_gmt":"2007-03-13T19:47:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/03\/e-mails-reveal-details-about-u-s-attorney-scandal\/"},"modified":"2007-03-13T13:47:00","modified_gmt":"2007-03-13T19:47:00","slug":"e-mails-reveal-details-about-u-s-attorney-scandal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/03\/e-mails-reveal-details-about-u-s-attorney-scandal\/","title":{"rendered":"E-mails reveal details about U.S. attorney scandal"},"content":{"rendered":"

I\u2019m going through the e-mail exchanges between White House and Justice Department officials about the decision made last year to fire eight U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorneys. The documents were released today, and I\u2019m looking for interesting tidbits.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The e-mails can be found online by clicking here<\/a> and here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

For more information on the current status of the scandal, scroll down to read today\u2019s earlier article. Here\u2019s what I found in the e-mails:<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 Many have pointed out, as evidence that the current administration wasn\u2019t doing anything unusual in getting rid of the eight last year, that former President Bill Clinton got rid of a number of U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorneys when elected. But in one e-mail that is listed as \u201cconfidential,\u201d Attorney General Alberto Gonzales\u2019 former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, explains why the current scandal is different.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Sampson is the Justice staffer who resigned Monday as the scandal continued to unfold.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Former Presidents Clinton and Ronald Reagan, his e-mail states, never got rid of attorneys they appointed themselves. They only ousted attorneys appointed by their predecessors. The e-mail discusses the practical barriers to getting rid of attorneys in the middle of a presidential term and ways to overcome those problems.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In another e-mail to former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, Sampson recommended three prosecutors to be fired \u2013 Iglesias\u2019 name is not on the list \u2013 but added a carrot at the end.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cIf you pushed me, I\u2019d have 3-5 additional names that the White House might want to consider,\u201d Sampson wrote in the April 14, 2006 e-mail.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In a Nov. 15, 2006 memo included in the e-mail, the Justice Department laid out its plan to fire the attorneys, listing Iglesias as one of seven. Iglesias and Domenici were to be called on the same day to be notified that the administration \u201chas determined to give someone else the opportunity to serve as U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorney.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The plan included steps to deal with the political fallout, including insisting that \u201cthe administration made the determination to seek the resignations (not any specific person at the White House or Department of Justice).\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In a Dec. 4, 2006 e-mail exchange, staffers discussed the plan to notify the attorneys of their firings on Dec. 7. The day was chosen because, before that, they were all in Washington<\/st1:city>, D.C.<\/st1:state><\/st1:place> for a conference. Waiting until they returned to their home states would \u201creduce chatter,\u201d the e-mail states.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In a second e-mail on that day, the plan was finalized. The e-mail states that White House political and counsel offices (headed by Karl Rove and Miers) have signed off, \u201cand acknowledged that we have to be committed to following through once the pressure comes.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

A revised copy of the plan included in that e-mail states that the White House, not Justice Department, was to call Domenici to notify him of Iglesias\u2019 firing.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 On Dec. 7 a staffer wrote that, after being informed of Iglesias\u2019 firing, Domenici\u2019s chief of staff \u201cis happy as a clam\u201d and would get replacement candidate names to the White House immediately.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In a Jan. 10 e-mail, Gonzales\u2019 chief of staff wrote to Iglesias that he could use the attorney general as a reference.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cNot a problem. Good luck!\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n

\n

Update, 3 p.m.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

There\u2019s more. Click here<\/a> to read Part 3 of the e-mails, and here<\/a> to read Part 4. Here are some interesting points from them:<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In a Jan. 31, 2006 e-mail, Justice staffers discussed caseloads in New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:State> that Iglesias had to handle. One staffer noted that the Las Cruces<\/st1:place><\/st1:City> office had to handle high numbers of immigration and narcotics cases, which \u201cdoes squeeze out\u201d the office\u2019s ability to handle other cases. It\u2019s an indication that the department was discussing, as early as January 2006, issues with Iglesias\u2019 performance.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The e-mail makes reference to Iglesias defending himself against a complaint or inquiry from Domenici about the handling of cases.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The e-mail includes a July 2005 report on the status of the District of New Mexico, which was Iglesias\u2019 responsibility, and a meeting with Iglesias. The report states that Iglesias \u201cwas well respected by the agencies, judiciary, and the USAO (U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorney office) staff. He provided good leadership to the USAO and was appropriately engaged in the operations of the office.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

That\u2019s important because Justice contends Iglesias was fired, in part, because he was often absent from work.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 E-mails indicate phone calls between Domenici and Justice staffers on Sept. 23, 2005, Jan. 31, 2006 and April 6, 2006.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In a June 20, 2006 e-mail, a White House staffer wrote that New Mexico GOP heavyweight Mickey Barnett contacted the White House and wanted to meet with someone from the Justice Department to discuss Iglesias. Barnett and GOP Attorney Pat Rogers were to meet with someone the next day, the document states.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 In a Dec. 14, 2006 e-mail, Sampson wrote that the White House \u201cwants this guy\u201d to replace Iglesias, \u201cbut Domenici is not so sure.\u201d The \u201cguy\u201d is not named in the redacted document.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cSupposedly, Domenici is going to send over names tomorrow (not even waiting for Iglesias\u2019 body to cool),\u201d the e-mail states.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

This reveals that the White House originally wanted someone other than the four candidates Domenici recommended for consideration. It also showed Domenici\u2019s eagerness to get rid of Iglesias.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u2022 Domenici sent his recommendations on Jan. 8. They were Rogers, Jim Bibb, T. Glenn Ellington and Charles Piefer. The e-mail from Domenici Chief of Staff Steve Bell indicates which was the senator\u2019s \u201coverwhelming choice,\u201d but the name has been redacted from the public document.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I\u2019m going through the e-mail exchanges between White House and Justice Department officials about the decision made last year to fire eight U.S. attorneys. The documents were released today, and I\u2019m looking for interesting tidbits. The e-mails can be found online by clicking here and here. For more information on the current status of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1400","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1400","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1400"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1400\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1400"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1400"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1400"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}