Documents released today by the DOJ include a 93-page collection of letters and e-mails regarding the US attorney firings and the congressional hearings on those.
I was looking through the PDF DOJ Document Set 2 Released on 3-28-2007 and found a draft letter that was being prepared in response to Harry Reids's letter, dated 8 February 2007, re Cummings.
There is a cover e-mail (see page 74 of 93) from Kyle Sampson to Christopher G. Oprison:
From: Sampson, Kyle
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 6:02 PM
To: ‘Oprison, Christopher G.
Cc: Hertling, Richard
Subject: Reid letter v.4
Importance: High
Attachments: reid letter re cummins-griffin v.4.doc
Chris, I accepted your changes and then made some changes -- most are for accuracy (though a couple are stylistic). Call me (I need to leave in 5 minutes for my daughter’s dance recital!).
Now to the draft letter. Although Kyle claims he accepted the changes, he didn't turn tracking off, so the PDF captures both the before and after.
In referring to Senate approval of US attorneys, there is a slight change in wording from the original:
...the Deputy Attorney General did not state or imply that Mr. Griffin would be appointed as the U.S. Attorney without Senate confirmation. Such a statement would be inconsistent with the Department's stated position that it would strive to have each vacancy filled by a Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney.
to the following:
...the Deputy Attorney General did not state or imply that Mr. Griffin would be appointed as the U.S. Attorney without Senate confirmation. Such a statement would be inconsistent with the Department's stated position that, we are committed to having a Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney in all 94 federal districts.
There is quite a difference between the phrases "strive to" and "committed to," is there not? This is all in line with their SOP of pretending to be committed to doing things the right way (Senate-confirmed appointments in this case) while they had no intention of doing so.
This entire paragraph was deleted:
Mr. Cummins’ continued service as U.S. Attorney was first considered after the Department learned of Mr. Cummins’ stated interest in possibly resigning for a position in the private sector. As the Deputy Attorney General testified, this commenced well prior to considering the other U.S. Attorneys to resign for reasons related to their performance and was instead "related to the opportunity to provide a fresh start with a new person in that position." Also, a general matter, it is often preferable, to the extent practicable, to appoint a permanent replacement who has experience with and familiarity of the workinge of the particular office, as Mr. Griffin did.
And was replaced with:
As the Deputy Attorney General testified, Mr. Cummins's continued service as U.S. Attorney was not considered at the same time as the other U.S. Attorneys that the Deputy Attorney General acknowledged were asked to resign for reasons related to their performance. As the Deputy Attorney General testified, the request that Mr. Cummins resign was "related to the opportunity to provide a fresh start with a new person in that position."
There are other more minor changes too.