|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Apr 1, 2007 15:19:53 GMT -6
Considerable evidence exists that U.S. Attorney Carol Lam was fired to obstruct further prosecution and investigation of corruption cases. Lam's case is described in a January 13th article in the San Diego Union-Tribune by writers Kelly Thornton and Onell R. Soto. The title of the article is Lam stays silent about losing job. Below are some excerpts from the article. " Lam stays silent about losing job.... " Sources have told TheSan Diego Union-Tribune that Lam was asked to step down because she failed to make smuggling and gun cases a priority, choosing instead to focus on fewer cases that she considered more significant, such as public corruption and white-collar crime.
Some lawyers theorized yesterday that it wasn't just misplaced priorities that led to her impending ouster. The Randy “Duke” Cunningham case has spawned other corruption probes of Republicans in Washington, leading to conjecture that politics played a part in the decision to force her out...." The full article can be found at www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070113/news_1m13lam.htmlLam has been involved in numerous corruption cases involving Republicans, including former Congressman Randy Duke Cunningham, political consultant Larry Remer, San Diego City Councilmen Ralph Inzunza and Michael Zucchet. (Zucchet was later acquited.) Lam spent almost a year presonally prosecuting a national hospital chain that was allegedly paying off doctors in return for referrals. She was also involved in several ongoing investigations, including that of Congressman Jerry Lewis (Republican-California). Lam's firing will certainly hinder further action on current investigations. It's not much of a leap to think she was fired for just that reason.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Apr 3, 2007 14:59:45 GMT -6
Below is a link and post from Democratic Underground by poster "revbludge" at the Daily Kos (and reposted at DU by "Demeter"), restating the obvious motive of the U.S. Attorney firings: the removal of Carol Lam to obstruct further investigation into White House and other Republican corruption. www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=272131&mesg_id=272131" It Was All About Carol Lam, Always. by revbludge /Daily Kos Topic URL www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x272131#272131 272131, It Was All About Carol Lam, Always. by revbludge /Daily Kos Posted by Demeter on Sun Apr-01-07 09:57 AM
www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/30/16466/5597
My theory is that Carol Lam was originally the sole target. (It was on May 10, 2006, that Lam notified the Justice Department of her plan to serve search warrants on Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, the No. 3 official at the CIA. This trail of corruption is alleged to encompass the CIA, Pentagon, and perhaps the White House.)....The Rove White House and the Dept. of Justice assembled a list of seven other US Attorneys plus Lam, in order to create a plausible cover story for her dismissal. If a bundle of attorneys were replaced with a common rationale for dismissal, Lam's dismissal would stick out less like a sore thumb. (The Rove White House clearly misread the political landscape and the communications revolution. Lately this kind of Rovian faulty calculus and overreaching has become more and more apparent.)....While compiling this "smokescreen list," Rove and Miers detected other targets for dismissal for political reasons, and added their names.
After the election, firing the US Attys became much more risky, but the WH-DOJ axis went ahead with it anyway. The risk of Lam continuing to investigate a chain of corruption that stretched all the way to DC outweighed the other risk...That's why Kyle Sampson's "list" was never a serious aggregation of "performance review" data from competent, objective sources. His list was an evanescent work-in-progress that has left no paper trail at all, apparently...Kyle Sampson seems to have understood the "performance issues" were a cover rationale. In an e-mail dated May 11, 2006, Sampson urged the White House counsel's office to call him regarding "the real problem we have right now with Carol Lam."...Because Sampson knew the "performance issues" were a cover rationale, not the real reason for the dismissals, they did not need to be seriously investigated & firmly documented. And they weren't, as Sen. Whitehouse et al. established on Thursday.
Possibly Rove and Miers never "officially" discussed the master plan regarding Lam with AG Gonzales, nor with Kyle Sampson and other DOJ employees at his level....Sampson simply followed directives from the AG and White House to "assemble" a list of USAs about whom complaints had been made. People pipelined complaints and bad performance reviews to him, and the list took shape....Armed with a list of people who had similar "performance issues," The DOJ could then plausibly fire Carol Lam under cover of the rationale that they had a "policy" of replacing attorneys who weren't carrying out Bush's alleged "signature" agenda items, i.e. firearms and immigration cases, aggressively enough....David Iglesias was a last-minute pick for this list, chosen purely because of his refusal to indict Democrats immediately before an election. Before that, Iglesias was a DOJ golden boy, cited as a real "comer" for his expertise, exemplary record, and "diversity."
Only the "principals" knew the whole master plan was about. The disjuncture between what the "principals" knew and what they told Gonzales and DOJ underlings like Sampson caused a ruckus. Because Gonzales was kept out of the "Lam + 7" plan loop, he did not have his story straight, and screwed up by making conflicting statements.
My theory may be flimsy as hell, but it has the merit of meshing beautifully with one segment of Sampson's account. When he cutely told Miers and Bill Kelley "Patrick Fitzgerald could be added to this list," a stone-cold silence answered him. "They just looked at me."
Imagine their consternation. Ye Gods! Add the notorious Fitzmas to a list that was supposed to defuse accusations of political dismissal? Ehhh."
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Apr 4, 2007 7:15:04 GMT -6
I guess then, it was just prudent to put Rove's boy in Arkansas, to pick up where Starr left off in trying to crucify the Clintons?
GB
|
|