US attorney firings weighed in 2005

Headline News

[##_1L|1283461995.jpg|width="140" height="112" alt=""|_##]In early 2005 the Justice Department advocated the removal of up to 20 percent of the nation's US attorneys whom it considered to be "underperforming" but retaining prosecutors who were "loyal Bushies," according to e-mails released by Justice late yesterday.

The three e-mails also show that presidential adviser Karl Rove asked the White House counsel's office in January 2005 whether it planned to proceed with a proposal to fire all 93 federal prosecutors. Officials said yesterday that Rove was opposed to that idea but wanted to know whether the Justice Department planned to carry it out.

The e-mails provide new details about the early decision-making that led to the firings of eight US attorneys last year, indicating that Justice Department officials endorsed a larger number of firings than has been disclosed and that Rove expressed an early interest in the debate.

The messages also show that an internal administration push to remove a large number of federal prosecutors was well underway even as Alberto R. Gonzales, then the White House counsel, was preparing for Senate hearings on his nomination to be attorney general.

Gonzales talked "briefly" in December 2004, the messages show, with D. Kyle Sampson, who would become his chief of staff at the Justice Department, about the plan to remove US attorneys. Justice spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said Gonzales has "no recollection" of discussing the prosecutors' firings at the time, when he was preparing for his January 2005 confirmation hearings.

The dismissals, and the Bush administration's shifting explanations for them, led a growing number of lawmakers to demand Gonzales's resignation this week. Justice Department documents released Tuesday contradicted the contention that the White House was not closely involved.

A second Republican, Senator Gordon Smith, Republican of Oregon, called for Gonzales's ouster yesterday. Senator John E. Sununu, Republican of New Hampshire, said Wednesday that Gonzales should resign.

"The senator believes, as a matter of credibility, it would be most helpful to have an attorney general we can have full confidence in," said Smith's spokeswoman.

Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas, one of six Democrats to support Gonzales's confirmation, also demanded his resignation after learning of e-mails that showed Justice Department officials planning to circumvent Pryor on the replacement for a fired Little Rock US attorney in 2006. Pryor said Gonzales had told him there was no attempt to avoid his input.

None of the three new e-mails is from Rove himself. They are part of a string of e-mail correspondence among other officials.

Related listings

  • The Key Number Is Net Income per Lawyer

    The Key Number Is Net Income per Lawyer

    Headline News 03/16/2007

    The only number that is down for Stevens & Lee's 2006 financial performance is its hours billed, as the firm posted double-digit increases in revenue and profit. The firm saw a 10.3 percent increase in gross revenue, from $102 million in 2005 to ...

  • Giuliani law firm lobbies for Venezuela firm

    Giuliani law firm lobbies for Venezuela firm

    Headline News 03/15/2007

    Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani's law firm lobbies for Citgo Petroleum Corp., which is controlled by the Venezuelan state oil company and President Hugo Chavez, but the firm said on Wednesday that Giuliani has never worked on the accoun...

  • Law firm co-founder joins Skadden, Arps

    Law firm co-founder joins Skadden, Arps

    Headline News 03/13/2007

    Jerry Salzman, longtime outside counsel for the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, joined Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom on Monday, leaving the law firm he co-founded as it winds down operations.Freeman, Freeman & Salzman is going out of busi...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read