Skip to main content

View Diary: Senator Whitehouse Busts Gonzales for Burying the DOJ Internal Investigation (251 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  separate cars (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rhfactor, standingup, greenearth

    The purposes of an opr and an oig investigation would be different, although there might be overlap in the context of prepartion to testify before Congress and testimony.

    They do have different standards and goals - like if a client had a malpractice claim against a lawyer and also someone had a state bar ethics complaint against them.  Different vehicles.  

    •  But the key here (11+ / 0-)

      may be Paul Clement.  TPMuckraker reported this a couple of weeks ago:

      That means Clement was in charge of personnel decisions relating to Monica Goodling (in other words, it was his call to make her the first ever DoJ official to stay on the payroll after pleading the Fifth), he's supervising the Department's joint investigation into the firings by the Office of Professional Responsibility and Inspector General, and he's in charge of which documents are doled over to Congress and which aren't.

      Read Paul Kiel's full report on it for more on Clement.  

      •  Paul "what torture?" Clement? (11+ / 0-)

        If you click through the Muck report they link to the Jan 2007 Legal Times profile

        Clement, then deputy solicitor general, was arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court that Congress, in its post-9/11 authorization of military force, had also in effect given the green light to the military detention of Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen arrested on American soil. Testing the limits of Clement’s argument, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked whether the same congressional resolution would authorize "mild torture" of detainees. "Some systems do that to get information," she said. Clement replied sharply: "Well, our executive doesn’t."

        Eight hours later, CBS News began airing the first infamous photos from Abu Ghraib prison. . .

        Yep - I'm sure he had well researched what was going on - pay not attention to the OLC opinions and WHC memos rah rahing torture and the JAG and DOJ complaints and the Geneva Conventions violations reports etc.   He's a wide-eyed boy and I'm sure nothing will get by him.


      •  OK...Paul Clement is driving...according to TPM (9+ / 0-)

        He has strong legal bona fides, and he has argued for the Administration in front of the Supreme Court. From the comments in the TPM article referenced above:

        Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: Clement lost this case on whether military commissions for Guantánamo Bay detainees are authorized under U.S. and international law.

        Rumsfeld v. Padilla: In a 5-4 decision, the Court agreed with Clement’s argument that a U.S. citizen captured on American soil and designated as an enemy combatant can be detained by the military.

        Hamdi v. Rumsfeld: The Court upheld the right of a U.S. citizen who was captured overseas and detained in the United States as an enemy combatant to contest his detention in U.S. courts. Clement argued against that right.

        Is his loyalty to the Rule of Law and the Constitution? Will he go where the evidence leads?OR is he loyal to political hacks?

        More importantly, who oversees his conduct of this investigation?

        And even more important what actions can we take now to insure that the investigation is not buried and insure that the public gets a full accounting.

        Beware the Will o'the Wisp.A lantern that leads to the edge of the chasm is not a true light...

        by portorcliff on Fri Apr 20, 2007 at 12:06:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site