Comments (26)

Leoniceno wrote on March 9, 2007 2:09 PM:

I'm interested in the 'slipping in' part that enabled this scheme to go forward. Who was it that put in that part of the law, and was it written by the executive branch? If so, who in the executive branch?

It reminds me of the Robert Moses scheme where he wrote new laws for the Manhattan Authority, which he controlled, that the Authority would exist without intervention until all the bonds that were issued were paid back-- what no one noticed was that there was no obligation to ever pay back the bonds, thus dissolving the organization. It was a cheap trick that was the legal basis that kept him in power for forty years.

This is an executive power grab slipped into a bill that legislators had a Patriotic Duty to vote for without consideration. I think it extremely likely that the provision in the Patriot Act and the firings of prosecutors are part of the same effort. Otherwise it's too much of a coincidence.

This is such an egregious attempt to shanghai Congress that perhaps they will stop roling over for a President that long ago showed himself to be irresponsible.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 9, 2007 2:14 PM:

Want to bet a rash of corruption cases against Democrats will break out in 2008 during a presidential election year?

Brooklynite wrote on March 9, 2007 2:28 PM:

Leoniceno, in todays vocabulary Moses was a "skilled bureaucratic infighter". The old term, "power-hungry scumbag", is no longer operative.

Heads need to roll over this stuff. The republic cannot withstand another Watergate/Iran-Contra slap on the wrist.

We need real jail time for these crooks, or it's all going to happen again and again.

jeffgee wrote on March 9, 2007 2:33 PM:

One more example of how the GOP can't get what they want democratically, they rig the game. From the stolen election of 2000 onward, they got their way by any means necessary. All in the service of establishing a permanent GOP majority.
By 2006, they proved how craven they are and the voters showed a lot of them the door.

P J Evans wrote on March 9, 2007 2:43 PM:

I have the feeling that 'GOP' should really read 'waiting for RICO prosecution'. They've pulled this kind of legal maneuvering, to get things set up to their benefit, enough times that even the MSM should have figured out to be skeptical of them.

Arkansan wrote on March 9, 2007 3:00 PM:

“Was planning to….”

How about “succeeded in planting….” Arkansas has a Republican hack, Rove look alike, in place today who admits openly he has no intention to seek Senate confirmation.

rumpole wrote on March 9, 2007 3:01 PM:

The language was slipped in by Specter's staff, most likely (almost definitely) at the behest of the Adminstration, b/c the Senate doesn't usually cede its powers.

dj wrote on March 9, 2007 3:07 PM:

When will we have the privilege of hearing about the first U.S. Attorney fired as part of this very same corrupt scheme? Perhaps the fact that this story was ignored by the media, and is currently totally ignored by all, progressive blog or otherwise, is why so many prosecutors were ultimately fired- it was so easy to get away with it!

Frederick Black was the interim U.S. attorney for the territories some years ago. Jack Abramoff was paid to arrange for this man to be fired by Bush. (Felony Alert!). "Black told FBI agents investigating the wide-ranging influence-peddling scandal spawned by Abramoff that he was replaced because he stirred political controversy by starting his own, earlier probe of Abramoff." From "Abramoff sought credit for work he didn’t do", MSNBC, Joel Seidman, June 30, 2006.

lestatdelc wrote on March 9, 2007 3:27 PM:

Is there an explicit legal obligation prior to the legislative change slipped into the reauthorization, that made all US Attorney appointments pending Congressional approval?

(lol... security word "screw")

Specter + PATRIOT wrote on March 9, 2007 3:37 PM:

The idea Specter didn't know what his staff slipped into PATRIOT, it's just too much BS to bear.

"Not me, it was my staff acting without my knowledge"

!!??? !@#! Why not "my dog ate it" for full comic effect?

That excuse is becoming all too common when it should NEVER be an excuse. Is that really the new standard for accountability?

Specter is still personally responsible for his staff, and the WH still felt comfortable using his office to slip this in, knowing he'd take it and roll over, just as he always does.

Now specter is dragging ass on the USA hearings.
He was clearly trying to discredit Iglesias, playing dumb as though there was another explanation besides unethical pressuring for the call.

Why the absurd habit of giving Specter the benefit of the doubt? All evidence indicates Specter and the WH use that irrational habit against Dems, again and again. Specter is a tool for the WH to pull stunts like this. That's the reputation he deserves.

Time to call him on it once and for all. Anyone still not wise to his act also deserves ridicule for being a chump.

As another poster put it, Specter is "Lucy" to some Democrats as "Charlie Brown." they just keep falling for the innocent act. But Charlie Brown in context of a US Lawmaker, the only opposition we have to people like Bush, not an endearing character, just an idiot.

Node of Evil wrote on March 9, 2007 3:40 PM:

I find it interesting that "Resume padding" was and is so important to the administration. What's the purpose? It's particularly interesting because this comes in the area of law enforcement; I'd think that at least half of competent and well-trained police officers and law-enforcement officials lean conservative. I can think of a couple with pretty decent resumes, too, who don't need "padding". Perhaps they want to ensure a steady supply of "qualified" talking heads for engaging the media?

Ian wrote on March 9, 2007 3:40 PM:

It seems so obvious that it starts in Specter's office, which makes his current tough-talk so galling. When is he going to answer questions about what went on in his office?

When will the mainstream media pick up this story?

Adam Cole wrote on March 9, 2007 3:43 PM:

There is a recurring pattern wherein Arlen Specter sets himself up as one of the loudest blabbermouths on a contentious issue, talking a big game and issuing what appear to be threats against the Administration. All the while, of course, he is quietly working to stanch the political bleeding and find a broader way to legitimize Bush's power grabs.

With the warrantless wiretapping, we heard him braying about violations of FISA while suggesting that perhaps the Executive had all the authority it needed under Article II.

Now we have him fulminating at DoJ and AG Gonzales, even though he was the one who made all these antics possible by opening a key legislative loophole on the sly. He further compounds his chutzpah with claims of ignorance--his "staff" inserted the provision without his knowledge, and if the Dems didn't find the needle in the haystack in the subsequent 3 months before the measure came to a final vote, then it's their own fault.

Really? Has Specter then rebuked and/or fired those staff members who were responsible? Has he categorically repudiated the offending language in the PATRIOT Act, and introduced his own bill to reverse it? If not, why not?

Rather than allowing Specter to become its most prominent de facto spokesman, I would hope the Senate Judiciary Committee chair would ask Specter to recuse himself from votes pertaining to this matter as members thoroughly investigate his material involvement.

And it would sure help if the DC press corps met Specter's pronouncements with appropriate skepticism and caution, instead of salivating over every morsel just because he's a Republican mouthing words that sound like criticism.

Node of Evil wrote on March 9, 2007 3:52 PM:

...It strikes me that so much of the Republican political machine is like a get-rich-quick scam. In this case, though, the goal is get-smart-quick. It's like they're building a parallel academic and professional universe where "merit" isn't defined as we'd usually define it (i.e., you do a good job and demonstrate your skills). Rather, it's defined as who can do the most for the movement itself. Or, who can most help the movement achieve its goals. To that end they'll nominate someone as a USA simply because that person has proven effective at furthering the agenda of the party. But it's a scam, because they're trying to get credentials that stand up in the world outside their bubble, and they aren't doing the necessary work or don't have the skills.

Anonymous wrote on March 9, 2007 3:59 PM:

"Heads need to roll over this stuff. The republic cannot withstand another Watergate/Iran-Contra slap on the wrist. ... We need real jail time for these crooks, or it's all going to happen again and again."

I have to agree with that. It seems the scams just get slicker each time, and pervade the Government deeper to the roots.

Look at Abramoff. He still wasn't convicted for his main crimes, just for side show business deals where he got sloppy. All the other Abramoffs will just keep noses a little cleaner, stay away from the organized crime, and make legit-corruption a 9-5 job. But collectively the system of Lobbyists and Government corruption is just as corrupt as with Abramoff.

The defense mechanisms such as greater transparency fail to keep up with ever more sophisticated and opaque attacks.

And the crooks just walk away, or more specifically walk into lucrative careers in the private sector.

Your odds of being caught for petty theft, such as sticking up a 7/11 for petty cash, must be hundreds of times greater than for looting millions, corrupting justice, subverting Democracy, or participating in gross corruption in office or on K-Street.

If we wanted to evolve generations of ever more virulent super-crooks, like colonies of antibiotic resistant bacteria, we could hardly design a more lush and accommodating laboratory environment.

Anonymous wrote on March 9, 2007 4:25 PM:

"..It strikes me that so much of the Republican political machine is like a get-rich-quick scam."

I prefer the evolutionary comparison, that to carnivores prior to evolution of social intelligence. Like Alligators for example, just mindless eating machines. The kind of animals that would sooner eat one of their own species than create technology or art, and utterly lack compassion.

In fact thye do feed on thier own, such as the Evangelical mega-churches that Ralph Reed (who was first head of the Christain Coalition) referred to as "wackos" in his emails to Abramoff. Reed, Abramoff, and others like him aren't Christian, not Jews, nor agnostic, nor atheist.

They're Nihilists, in the most derogatory sense.

That's why "Compassionate Conservative" was and is such a big joke. It was always a slogan GOP insiders sneered at, used to manipulate rank and file Republicans they have nothing but contempt for. When some, Rove in particular, proved what a winner Evangelical votes could be for Republicans, they all found Jesus, and NASCAR, in a hurry.

That's the black heart of today's Movement Republicanism. Utterly contemptuous of humanity in general, especially their victims, doubly so for the poor and rural, and most of all the rank and file Republican voters they harvest like cattle.

Uncle Don wrote on March 9, 2007 4:26 PM:

The controversial provision allowing the appointment of U. S. Attorneys without Senate confirmation was put into the renewal of the Patriot Act by Michael O'Neill, who at the time was Chief Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee chaired by Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. O'Neill acted at the request of the Justice Department and the White House.

Read all about it here:

http://www.slate.com/id/2161260

Without a hint of irony, the security code for this post is "screw."

bjobotts wrote on March 9, 2007 4:27 PM:

All replacements would be in key areas of the country that link strongly with Democrats and the next elections. Sounds like Rove Tactics, huh?

nellieh wrote on March 9, 2007 4:27 PM:

Something is rotten in Senator Specter's office.
The staffer alledgedly "slipped" the ammendment into a bill so stealthly that the Specter didn't know it and is still on his staff? I will bet this guy was placed there to keep an eye on Specter in return for their support during his primary. If he could he should fire this guy unless he was privy to the plan. I would like to know how an non-elected person just makes laws. Could I? I think I would win that bet.

Anonymous wrote on March 9, 2007 4:34 PM:

Adam Cole-

Great post, and very true. Good examples of this continually reoccurring pattern of duplicitous behavior from Specter.

Some speculate Specter was pressured, that the new breed of ruthless Republicans have such a grip on the party that selling out was the only way he could hold his seat.

Others think he's always been a phony.

I think that's an academic side point.

The fact remains, his actions follow a pattern. Each time he rolls over for some of the most egregious excesses by the Administration against DoJ, exactly what he's supposed to be defending. In some ways his tough talk aid the process of rolling over by giving him cover and the illusion of good intentions.

(btw, codeword was poison, perfectly descriptive of Specter)

Specter + PATRIOT changes wrote on March 9, 2007 4:49 PM:

The guy who slipped in the PATRIOT provision isn't on Specter's staff anymore. In fact, he's now a USA, for Utah I believe. Coincidence, I'm sure.

Specter claims not to have noticed. He's even co-sponsored a bill to have it changed, after he was busted by Feinstein for the PATRIOT change.

However, here's some facts for consideration:

He never publicly recognized the PATRIOT change until Feinstein called him on it, at which point he claimed to be surprised. He didn't go on the talk show circuit to berate the Bush Admin, Gonzalez, or the DOJ for making a fool of him, as one might expect if he'd actually been fooled.

Michael O'Neill was never publicly trounced for slipping it into PATRIOT, at the behest of the WH, supposedly without Specter's knowledge. He's presently a Bush appointed USA himself!

Specter has a history of public criticism of the Bush admin, while working behind the scenes to insure everything they request. It actually helps the Bush admin, serving to distract the public, giving the illusion the Bush admin faces tough oversight and negotiations with independant Senators.

specter + PATRIOT changes wrote on March 9, 2007 5:18 PM:

"I find it interesting that "Resume padding" was and is so important to the administration. What's the purpose?"

That's an easy one. Countless examples show that this Admin, and Rove especially, like to pick unaccomplished people from obscure places, putting them in important positions where they seek favors or just someone to turna blind eye. The apopintment of convicted crook to the FDA regulatory body for example. The quacks they've put in the EPA, or FCC. Brownie and New Orleans. Etc.

Their only qualification is Bush/Rove loyalty and in fat their lack of other qualifications is insurance for their loyalty.

A lot of these guys are recruited early as college Republicans, for good reason. Rove himself is the archetype for college Republicans. They're outsiders on campus, already have disdain for the university system, liberal academics, and the lasting picture many will have of the left is a caricature of young, hotheaded, and inexperienced liberals on campus. Straight out of college they're fast-tracked into lucrative positions of power, where only loyalty and ideological purity matter.

Importantly: They never actually run businesses or create wealth themselves. Their job is to represent the interests of the corporate sector who pay their wages through think tanks and foundations funded by K street and Big Business. They're essentially a marketing operation for Big Business that branches into fund raising, lobbying, and even administration of programs which they'd like to see hobbled. They;re even put in places like Iraq. Most of the US staff in the Iraqi green zone were totally unqualified kids, college Republicans and campaign volunteers. And look what happened. Reconstruction was totally botched, and tens, maybe hundreds of billions have just vanished with no accounting.

Rove was an aspiring college Republican, hand picked by Bush senior, made W's chauffeur and political tutor early on. Rove's early realization was that Evangelicals were the untapped voters, which is why Bush suddenly found Jesus, and claims to have stopped drinking in his 40s.

Ralph Reed, Jack Abramoff, Grover Norquist, all major players in the Republican/Evangelical "Revolution" were all hand picked College Republicans, selected for their zeal and malleability, groomed and given enormous power.

Patronage to loyalists. Loyalists recruited by think tanks and other extensions of the private sector. Loyalists who lack other qualifications so they'll always remain loyal. The private sector's coup d'état. Pure and simple.

Node of Evil wrote on March 9, 2007 6:18 PM:

s+p said:

'Patronage to loyalists. Loyalists recruited by think tanks and other extensions of the private sector. Loyalists who lack other qualifications so they'll always remain loyal. The private sector's coup d'état. Pure and simple.'

Yes, but they have to find a way to pass these guys off as credible to the rest of us who live outside that world. And that's where the scam part comes in -- using political influence to secure real-world jobs or credentials (or something that at least sounds similar) when otherwise they'd be unqualified to get them. Because when these folks are trotted out later, for whatever reason, people will respect their views because they once served as a U.S. Attorney, or a Senior Fellow with the Heritage Foundation, or whatever. The Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs draw alot of fire 'cause they're blatant hacks. Others, not so much, because they've been given this veneer of respectibility.

Anyways, the really odd thing about it is a.) how much time they spend deriding, for instance, academia, and b.) how hard they try to get credentials that are respected in that world, whether those are deserved or not. A bit of a contradiction, no?

Linda wrote on March 10, 2007 12:20 AM:

Rather than allowing Specter to become its most prominent de facto spokesman, I would hope the Senate Judiciary Committee chair would ask Specter to recuse himself from votes pertaining to this matter as members thoroughly investigate his material involvement.

And it would sure help if the DC press corps met Specter's pronouncements with appropriate skepticism and caution, instead of salivating over every morsel just because he's a Republican mouthing words that sound like criticism.

Posted by: Adam Cole
Date: March 9, 2007 03:43 PM

Yes! And we need to demand that he recuse himself and that he be investigated. What a worm that man has shown himself to be. Ugh! (Oh, the security code I had to enter to post this was
s-n-a-k-e --what great snark is that?)

different Linda wrote on March 10, 2007 3:35 PM:

"I find it interesting that "Resume padding" was and is so important to the administration. What's the purpose?"

How about some Resume padding to make these replacement "right wing neo-con hacks" more "qualified" for appointed judgeships? They do their best to get very friendly judges in place.

And goodness knows they will be needing them!

Despicable, the whole bunch of them!

steambomb wrote on March 11, 2007 3:20 AM:

I really do wish that they would rename that act. It is 180 degrees diametrically opposed to the essence of Patriotism.