DOJ does not have the credibility to investigate White House conduct

S

Sid9

Guest
CREW wants special prosecutor in missing White House e-mails case

02/04/2008 @ 1:38 pm


Filed by Nick Juliano



An independent watchdog is asking Attorney General Michael Mukasey to
appoint a special prosecutor to investigate alleged criminal mismanagement
by the Bush administration that resulted in the disappearance of more than
10 million internal e-mails.

Ongoing lawsuits and congressional investigations have revealed that the
White House apparently failed to properly maintain e-mail archives from
March 2003 until October 2005. This also means that millions of e-mails,
which could have provided valuable insight to historians examining the inner
workings of Bush administration as it planned the Iraq war or leaked the
identity of former CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson, likely are lost forever.

Because the White House's failure to maintain its archives may have violated
federal law, including the Federal Records Act and the Presidential Records
Act, a special prosecutor is needed, says Citizens for Responsibility and
Ethics in Washington, which is suing over the lost e-mails.

"The missing emails do not belong to the Bush administration, but to the
American people," CREW's executive director Melanie Sloan said in a news
release. "The Attorney General should take action to protect the right of
future generations to look back and understand the role of White House
officials in critical events."

House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman released a report showing
473 days in which no e-mails are archived, and he's scheduled a hearing for
later this month to examine what happened. Among those days are the week
after Saddam Hussein's capture, the day the White House learned of an
investigation of the Plame leak and key dates regarding Vice President Dick
Cheney's energy task force.

The White House also has acknowledged it recycled backup computer tapes
prior to October 2003, meaning no permanent archive of e-mails from that
timeframe exists.

CREW has previously requested special prosecutors be appointed to
investigate the US Attorney firing scandal, although neither Mukasey nor his
predecessor Alberto Gonzales took such a move.

"The need for an impartial special counsel is all the more pronounced, in
light o f the recent history of improper White House involvement in, and
politicization of, the work of the Department of Justice. For example, the
administration has made clear that it will never allow the Department of
Justice to pursue criminal contempt charges initiated by Congress against
White House officials, including former White House Counsel Harriet Miers,
and several U.S. Attorneys were fired for refusing to politicize criminal
investigations," Sloan wrote in her letter to Mukasey (.pdf).

"Frankly, the Department of Justice does not have the credibility or
demonstrated independence required to investigate potentially criminal
conduct by White House officials."
 
we thought maybe mukasey would be different from the latino lap dog,
gonzo....but alas, he's sucking bush's **** just like his predecessor.

seems that mukasey can't decide if pouring water into someone's lungs,
as they're strapped down on a board, until they pass out is torture...

what a ****ing idiot...

mukasey probably wouldn't be able to tell "for certain" whether gassing
6 million jews was a war crime or not....

"well, let's see, in some circumstances it might be, but then in others,
i.e. circumstances, that is, it might, to a reasonable person, not be
construed to be...you know, reasonable persons disagree on this whole
holocaust thing any way...you really just can't be sure....what is
murder anyway...what is torture...some things are just very hard for a
bush appointed attorney general to figure out...."

"well thank you for that enlightening answer mr attorney general, are
you ready to give another answer...???"

"oh yes, next question please..."
 
"abelincoln" <bushsucks@whitehouse.com> wrote in message
news:crmdnUVRb98rXTranZ2dnUVZ_s2tnZ2d@rcn.net...
> we thought maybe mukasey would be different from the latino lap dog,
> gonzo....but alas, he's sucking bush's **** just like his predecessor.
>
> seems that mukasey can't decide if pouring water into someone's lungs, as
> they're strapped down on a board, until they pass out is torture...
>
> what a ****ing idiot...


Given the nature of the position , his response in the affirmative would be
equal to declaring the actions of the CIA, the White House, and all those
politicans in the loop guilty.Why dont you make it a point to ask the
candidates running for office this question?In my view all of the above are
guilty, but I would like all the ducks to be in a row before dropping the
hammer.

>
> mukasey probably wouldn't be able to tell "for certain" whether gassing 6
> million jews was a war crime or not....
>
> "well, let's see, in some circumstances it might be, but then in others,
> i.e. circumstances, that is, it might, to a reasonable person, not be
> construed to be...you know, reasonable persons disagree on this whole
> holocaust thing any way...you really just can't be sure....what is murder
> anyway...what is torture...some things are just very hard for a bush
> appointed attorney general to figure out...."
>
> "well thank you for that enlightening answer mr attorney general, are you
> ready to give another answer...???"
>
> "oh yes, next question please..."
 
Back
Top