Kondracke assumed voter fraud as fact in claiming prosecutor firings were about "the failure to prosecute" it
SUMMARY: Morton Kondracke
said that the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the Bush
administration's firing of nine U.S. attorneys have "discovered
nothing specifically nefarious that any of -- that these firings had anything
to do with, except, maybe, the failure to prosecute voter fraud cases." In
fact, two of the fired prosecutors have said that they investigated voter fraud
allegations but found insufficient evidence to warrant prosecution or a grand
jury investigation, while administration officials have stated that a third was
fired for reasons unrelated to his performance.
On the July 11 edition of Fox News' Special Report, discussing Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the Bush administration's controversial firing of nine U.S. attorneys, Roll Call executive editor Morton M. Kondracke said that the committee has "discovered nothing specifically nefarious that any of -- that these firings had anything to do with, except, maybe, the failure to prosecute voter fraud cases." Host Brit Hume then asked: "The firings were about the failure to --," to which Kondracke replied: "Yeah." In fact, two of the fired prosecutors have said that they investigated such allegations but found insufficient evidence to warrant prosecution or a grand jury investigation, while administration officials, including Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, have stated that a third was fired for reasons unrelated to his performance. In addition, Kondracke's description of the hearings as "partisan harangues" and his assertion that "[t]he Democrats are using their subpoena power to try to -- and their power to hold hearings to try to treat the Bush administration like a piñata" ignored support by Republican committee members authorizing Taylor's subpoena.
As Media Matters for America has documented, David C. Iglesias, former U.S. attorney for New Mexico, set up a voter-fraud task force in that state in September 2004. But as a March 19 Washington Post article explained, the task force failed to identify any significant violations, and Iglesias -- in concurrence with the "election-crimes branch of the Justice Department's public integrity section" -- decided to shut down the operation. In addition, the March 19 Post article reported that Iglesias was "one of two chief federal prosecutors invited to teach at a 'voting integrity symposium' in October 2005. The symposium was sponsored by Justice's public integrity and civil rights sections and was attended by more than 100 prosecutors from around the country." According to the Post, Iglesias said that "the agency invited him back as a trainer last summer, just months before a Justice official telephoned to fire him." Further, Iglesias has alleged that Sen. Peter Domenici (R-NM) and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) "attempted to pressure him to speed up a probe of Democrats just before the November elections" -- both Domenici and Wilson have since acknowledged contacting Iglesias about his corruption investigations. In a March 5 article on Domenici's statement, the Post reported: "Legal experts say it violates congressional ethics rules for a senator or House member to communicate with a federal prosecutor regarding an ongoing criminal investigation."
Media Matters for America has also noted the example of John McKay, former U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington, who has alleged that his dismissal may have had to do with his decision not to bring voter fraud charges stemming from the 2004 Washington state governor's race, which was won by a Democrat. McKay testified during a House hearing that he did not convene a grand jury to investigate charges of voter election because he and the chief of the Justice Department's Election Crimes branch had conducted a preliminary investigation and determined "there was no evidence of voter fraud." A March 19 Washington Post article reported that the allegations of fraud in the governor's race -- which Democrat Christine Gregoire won by a margin of 129 votes after three recounts -- originated with the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a conservative group based in Olympia, Washington, as well as with several Republican leaders.
Further, a third fired U.S. attorney was reportedly discharged for reasons unrelated to his performance, and not for any "failure to prosecute voter fraud cases," as Media Matters has documented. On February 6, then-deputy attorney general Paul McNulty testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that former U.S. attorney H.E. "Bud" Cummins III's resignation was forced "to provide a fresh start with a new person in that position." This "new person" was J. Timothy Griffin, a former aide to White House senior adviser Karl Rove who replaced Cummins in December 2006. In a recently released December 19, 2006, email, D. Kyle Sampson, then-chief of staff to Gonzales, stated: "Getting him [Griffin] appointed was important to Harriet, Karl, etc." -- a reference to Rove and then-White House counsel Harriet Miers. As The Washington Post reported on April 20, when Gonzales was asked at an April 19 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing whether it was accurate that Cummins had no job-performance problems, Gonzales testified: "I would say that is a fair statement."
Additionally, a draft 2006 report prepared for the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) stated that "[t]here is widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud, or at least much less than is claimed, including voter impersonation, 'dead' voters, noncitizen voting and felon voters." The final version of the report released by the EAC stated that there was "a great deal of debate on the pervasiveness of fraud in elections," but, according to a June 22 Washington Post report, the EAC Inspector General is investigating the process of writing the report after "activist groups" raised charges that the changed conclusion was the result of partisanship and pressure from the Justice Department.
In addition, Kondracke's assertion that the hearings were a "partisan harangue" driven by "Democrats" who "are using their subpoena power" to "treat the Bush administration like a piñata" ignored public statements of support for the authorization of the subpoenas of administration officials by at least two Republican committee members. A June 14 Washington Post article on the subpoenas reported that Sen. Arlen Specter (PA), the Senate Judiciary Committee's ranking Republican, "said that he supports the decision by [Sen. Patrick] Leahy [D-VT] and [Rep. John] Conyers [D-MI] to issue the subpoenas." Moreover, as USA Today reported, when the committee, on a voice vote, gave Leahy, the Senate committee chairman, the power to subpoena White House officials, "Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, requested that his vote be recorded as 'aye.' "
From the July 11 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
HUME: And so it went as the senators tried to find out whether there is something really terribly improper in the president's firing of those U.S. attorneys, and whether the White House political director -- that was the job that was formerly held by Sara Taylor -- may have had anything do to do with it.
And it doesn't -- they didn't get very far because she was testifying under the constraints of executive privilege, and said, by the way, that she had never attended a meeting with the president in which the issue had come up.
Some thoughts on all this now from Bill Sammon, senior White House correspondent of the Washington Examiner, Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, and Mort Kondracke, executive editor for Roll Call, Fox News contributors all.
There was, of course, also a hearing in the House today on the Scooter Libby sentence commutation, in which the likes of Joe Wilson, whose role in this is well-known, testified. Did either of these hearings go anywhere?
KONDRACKE: No. And, you know, the public looks at Washington and sees nothing getting done. No immigration bill, no -- none of the other problems being solved. But what it does see is more partisan harangues, and this was more partisan haranguing. The Democrats are using their subpoena power to try to -- and their power to hold hearings to try to treat the Bush administration like a piñata.
And so -- and Sara Taylor was the one who got the hits today, and she didn't reveal anything. And this is not -- they're not going to get anywhere unless the courts say that executive privilege does not apply and that these people in the White House have got to testify.
HUME: But [unintelligible] -- is there anything to be gotten?
KONDRACKE: Well, that, we don't know. I mean, they have discovered nothing specifically nefarious that any of -- that these firings had anything to do with, except, maybe, the failure to prosecute voter fraud cases. But we don't even know --
HUME: The firings were about the failure to --
KONDRACKE: Yeah.

















Kondrake is a liar for Bush.
No ifs, ands or buts.
The firings were perfectly proper
"Failure to frame a Democrat" is a firing offense in any tyrannical Republican administration. Ask any loyal Bushie.
The Republican definition of "voter fraud":
Voting for a Democrat.
Ohio? Ohio, anyone? Mordrake, Ohio? Hello? Hello?
KONDRACKE: No. And, you know, the public looks at Washington and sees nothing getting done.
Wait a minute, Morty. The prosecutors decided to stop wasting their time on cases that didn't seem to have any credibility, they were fired for this, and the problem is that this is being investigated?
Damn Washington, investigating politically motivated wastes of taxpayer money. What a waste of taxpayer's money !
...when high-level GOP operative James Tobin was actually found guilty of jamming Democratic 'Get out the Vote' phone lines in order to keep voters away from the polls in 2002 by "orchestrating an election day phone-jamming plot against New Hampshire Democrats" --- the ACORN nut had already fallen off the Republican's "vote fraud" tree.
ACORN had "been vindicated of the various bogus charges, as virtually all of the frivolous lawsuits and investigations the GOP liars made so much noise about had simply collapsed by then -
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4372
I have this scar from stretching all the way from underneath my armpit to my bellybutton as a result of splitting my side laughing when I hear Republicans clap to Bush and his rhetoric about bringing democracy to Iraq while at the same time these clappers for Bush are behind stopping democracy here in the United States.
Voter fraud is rare but that doesn't stop Republicans from using this sky is falling tactic to stop democracy.
Bush will go down as a little partisan pissant. There will be nothing about him that says President of the United States and everything about him that says pissant Rove toy boy.
their main objective in new hampsire was to tilt the senate race, subsequently won by the republican. because the balance of the senate passed from the democrats to the gop in 2002 and the republicans were looking to make sure that happened. tobin subsequently became bush 2004 campaign chairman for new england. after his indictment the republican national committee paid all of his one million dollar legal bill. maybe they did not want him to talk about the dozens of calls he made to ken mehlman in the days immediately before the 02 election.
sample http://www.airamerica.com/ .
Hume,
"in which the likes of Joe Wilson, whose role in this is well-known, testified."
Can the man be any more biased, in tone and attitude? The talking heads at Faux are just so damn obvious its beyond me how any thinking human being could listen to anything they have to say about anything. When is the right wing in this country going to get their heads out of the sand and come to grips with the fact that for the last seven plus years the current wing of the republican party have lied to the whole damn country, countinue to lie to the whole damn country, and are backed up in these lies by the likes of Morton Knodracke, Bret Hume, etc. whose role in this is well-know ?
HAD ENOUGH, VOTE DEMOCRAT!!
This is why Alberto Gonzalez is an idiot; he allowed the argument to be framed this way.
I could care less if the Attorneys were fired because Bush didn't like their hair color. They are part of the executive branch and can be fired for any reason at any time.
Gonzalez allowed the argument to be framed which way?
Yeah, because I want good looking people working for me! Skills mean nothin...
and God forbid they showed any character or not follow the party line. Only yes men/women for this administration.
and if "any" reason is the fact that they refused to bring bogus charges, that's ok with you?
"They are part of the executive branch and can be fired for any reason at any time." - C.B.C.
Yes, so true...and being fired for not pursuing specious, Administration instigated, "voter fraud" charges is certainly one of the most valid reasons that comes to mind. Imagine, prosecutors that took their missions, and justice, more seriously than toadying--boy, talk about ethics in the dumper. Clearly, Bush had no idea who he was hiring.
And those pesky Democrats want to burn money investigating this? Surely they could be putting the money to better use. You know, maybe by having shiny new flag-draped "Support the Troops" buttons minted and mailed, gratis, to everyone who has had a family member killed or maimed in Iraq.
But C.B.C. maybe you can answer one question for me concerning the crackbrained Congressional investigations into the prosecuter firings...
Just what is it about "So help me God" that Bush finds so offensive?
Get in line, Darkmass, Coprophagousdescent hasn't answered my question about his vague statement yet.
I don't think either of us should be holding our breath.
Um, no offense ...lefty, but it looked to me like I was *in* line. :^)
(The queue built up mightily while I was carefuly honing my razor-sharp post.)
Uh, with the reservation that such firings to promote or hide illegal actions, or to punish those who refused to carry out illegal actions, is legally actionable. We shoulda fired Bungle in 2000, and shoulda fired his whole administration every month since, for cause. And we shoulda imprisoned every one of the SOBs for crimes committed even prior to official inauguration in 2001 (for example, Cheney launched the unwarranted surveillance before he was even sworn into office; and long before Bungle even knew of the existence of Al Queda.)
Hey Dubiousdissent.blogwhore.nut...That was one damn fine recitation of a useless right-wing talking point. Bravo...
Right, the second paragraph was a pile of 6 month old tripe, but can anybody help me with the first part--
"This is why Alberto Gonzalez is an idiot; he allowed the argument to be framed this way."
What is the "this" in "this is why..."? In what way was the argument framed, what was the argument, and how did Gonzalez allow it?
I'm serious, and a little in awe.In two short lines, CD has presented four unanswered questions out of thin air.
Little help?
"This is why Alberto Gonzalez is an idiot; he allowed the argument to be framed this way." - C.B.C
Huntingtonbeachlefty, even though people often like to say, "you cannot understand the mind of a terrorist", it's usually not that tough. Oh, maybe not every nook and dark cranny can be explored, but the overall sense of things can often be sussed.
Let's look at Alberto's sole direct contribution to the page, then do the least bit of extrapolation. Your brain may smoke the smallest bit from attempting to think like C.B.C, but you know, if it doesn't kill you it will make you stronger. :^)
"As The Washington Post [link to www.washingtonpost.com] color="#0052a3">reported on April 20, when Gonzales was asked at an April 19 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing whether it was accurate that Cummins had no job-performance problems, Gonzales testified: 'I would say that is a fair statement.'"
See what Gonzales has done? He has left his questioners with the impression that Cummins had no job-performance problems. The extrapolation is that *none* of the fired prosecutors were inept, blundering, on the take, or anything less then people doing their jobs in a sterling fashion. This sillyness on Gonzales's part is why Congress, and us, have reached the erroneous "conclusion" that the Department of Justice has been politicized and is the "reason" Congress feels it must pursue this political Mardi Gras.
If Alberto had kept his wits about him, and told the direct truth, every *one* of us, and Congress, would be certain the fired prosecuters deserved no less than a one-way ticket to Guantonomo. We would certainly realize how fortunate we were that Bush had saved us all from the people he hired.
Thank you for taking the time, Darkmass.
I just thought I'd give CopDis a chance to explain his post in a way that helped his cause.I think you may be better equipped to dissect his post than he is.
It's a good thing his blog is copied and pasted from Rush's website,as he seems to get into dangerous territory when trying to create thoughts from scratch.
"They are part of the executive branch and can be fired for any reason at any time."
Not for the first time, DubiousPissant, you are wrong. The Executive Branch is not the President's plaything, even though he thinks it is, any more than this is HIS government, even though he thinks it is.
Gonzalez didn't have an argument, he couldn't recall, 75 times!
I cautiously think he was responding to SFCretired, close posting times there. As SF was ranting mildly about our lying media. I'll make the wild ass assumption that somehow Alberto framed uh... the question, right the question. To be about the media lying. No? My brain hurts and I think mostly I need a lie down.
Just a note on "the Evergreen Freedom Foundation" (EFF). They are not a "conservative" "think tank" ("stink tank" or "septic tank" is more appropriate). They are an extremist, fringe group, cult like, led by a former stat rep, Bobby Williams, a clown by any definition, and funded by extremist right-wing nut groups. They refuse to reveal their funders but research has shown that groups like the Freidman Foundation, Scafie, etc., have provided funding for them to attack the rights of unions to engage in political action. While the US Chamber of Commerce illegally funded an attack on the Democratic candidate for AG in the state, the Evergreen Reactionary Foundation refused to persue the criminal activity. Oh well, they got their guy, a fruit-cake elected as AG. He stood with the EFF while they (the state) took a case to the US Supreme Court (instigated by the EFF) that essentially interferes with a ruling by the State Supreme Court that found such a law unconstitutional, in an attempt to limit or burden unions with political activity (no similar interference is contemplated for corporations). They are a strange combination of right-wing religous creeps and corporate masters (building groups, major manufactures, etc.) with a singualr belief in the elimination of all of the commons and the privatization of all government functions.
testing http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet