Even though no reason is needed to replace political appointees, David Iglesias proved he should have been fired, then caused collateral damage with a political single bullet that also may take down his senator and congresswoman with him.
Until Iglesias testified, Senate and House investigations into eight U.S. attorney replacements promised to be fishing expeditions — political charter boats filled with long-knifed Democrats yearning for control of the White House.
The cruel truth is that presidents run the executive branch. They put friends, contributors and even friends of friends into thousands of political positions. One plum is the U.S. attorney, the top law enforcer in each of 94 federal districts.
As the law stands today (and apparently the Department of Justice will not oppose a return to the old days when Senate confirmation or District Court approval was required) the Department of Justice can fill an unoccupied U.S. attorney’s desk in midterm without Senate or District Court approval. That’s the breaks.
Politics and the U.S. Department of Justice must be at arms length. It’s an absolute bright line that cannot be crossed. Iglesias knew it; so did his “former” friends, Sen. Peter Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson, both New Mexico Republicans.
Iglesias exposed wrongdoing by all three. All three flouted the rules. Iglesias knew that contact from a legislator over possible or pending civil or criminal matter was verboten. Amazingly, he testified that Domenici and Wilson each asked about matters reportedly under seal, yet Iglesias never reported the contacts to his superior in the Department of Justice. That’s politics, not prosecution.
At the Senate hearing, instead of learning about Bush administration meddling into investigations, we heard how the Department of Justice replaced the U.S. attorneys for varying degrees of cause. What a waste of time. Nothing is needed to send a political appointee packing. That’s why God created the civil service.
We did witness the birth of two ethics investigations. The senator, now lawyered up, was Iglesias’ mentor (he nominated Iglesias for the position). Wilson was Iglesias’ running mate when he failed in a bid to become New Mexico’s attorney general in 1998.
If the president wants to shuffle U.S. attorneys to make room for political friends and it’s legal — so what? It’s politics. The Department of Justice and every one of the 94 federal districts are multilayered, professionally run operations managed by tens of thousands of professional, nonpolitical prosecutors and support staff, i.e. civil servants.
The replacements may have been as clumsily conducted as possible from a management (and public relations) perspective, but a vacant U.S. attorney’s office does not grind justice to halt.
Over a decade, I served U.S. attorneys appointed by three presidents (two Republicans, one Democrat) and I never heard a political comment by anyone, from the U.S. attorney on down. We all knew that the president had appointed the U.S. attorney but that was the extent of politics in the office.
If a senator or congresswoman complains to the president or attorney general that a U.S. attorney isn’t aggressive enough and needs to be replaced and the president decides to appoint a new U.S. attorney, ho-hum.
It’s not pleasant to be replaced and dreams of a federal judgeship may evaporate with dismissal; but each “USA” is well aware that he or she serves at the pleasure of the president who appointed him or her.
When Bill Clinton was inaugurated, all U.S. attorneys were ordered to resign, not just eight of them. The only U.S. attorney in the U.S. permitted to remain in the job for some months after the inauguration was Michael Chertoff, a consummate prosecutor. It was a rare example of prosecution over politics.
Until a smoking gun appears in the attorney general’s hand, the disappointed former U.S. attorneys now will probably earn four times their old salaries at new law firms or ones to which they return.
Senate and House members will continue to waste our time on politics. And the professional men and women at the U.S. Department of Justice will continue to do their good work.
Richard Lavinthal is managing director of PRforLAW, LLC.



Commentary


SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Comments
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate
Vote on this comment: agree or disagree | Report as inappropriate