Document Release Implicates Sara Taylor

Think Progress is reporting that the Department of Justice has released new documents connecting former White House political chief (and top aid to Karl Rove) Sara Taylor and her deputy Scott Jennings to the U.S. Attorney scandal. Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy has released the following statement.

These documents, which should have been released by the Department long ago, provide further evidence that White House officials like former Political Director Sara Taylor were deeply involved in the mass firings of well-performing prosecutors. The Department of Justice should not be reduced to a political arm of the White House. We need an end to the White House’s stonewalling of our investigations so we can learn the truth.

Here is a link to the released documents.

There's more: "Document Release Implicates Sara Taylor" >>

New York Times To Congress--It's Subpoena Time

An editorial in this morning's New York Times neatly sums up Bradley Schlozman's testimony concerning the ACORN indictments and his role in the politicization of the Department of Justice.

Mr. Schlozman said it did not occur to him that the indictments could affect the campaign. That is hard to believe since the Justice Department’s guidelines tell prosecutors not to bring vote fraud investigations right before an election, so as not to affect the outcome. He also claimed, laughably, that he did not know that Acorn was a liberal-leaning group.

Mr. Schlozman fits neatly into the larger picture. Prosecutors who refused to use their offices to help Republicans win elections, like John McKay in Washington State, and David Iglesias in New Mexico, were fired. Prosecutors who used their offices to help Republicans did well.

All roads in this scandal lead to the White House. The White House refuses to make Harriet Miers, Karl Rove, Scott Jennings, Sara Taylor and William Kelley available for testimony under oath and have generally stonewalled regarding critical emails. At long last the Times editorial board has concluded

This noncooperation has gone on long enough. Mr. Leahy should deliver the subpoenas for the five White House officials and make clear that if the administration resists, Congress will use all available means to get the information it needs.

The Nattering Nabob says, "My God, even the New York Times gets it." The Nattering Nabob is right.

There's more: "New York Times To Congress--It's Subpoena Time" >>

Shorter Dana Perino-The Hatch Act Doesn't Apply To Republicans

Talking Points Memo has posted an interesting transcript from this morning's White House News Gaggle.

Reporter: How about this political interference with the Hatch Act?
Dana Perino: There wasn't political interference within the Hatch Act. What you're talking about is --

Reporter: Use of the government agencies?

Perino: It is perfectly lawful for the political appointees at the White House to provide informational briefings to political appointees at the agencies. No laws were broken, and we provided more information about that last night.

Reporter: Was that all vetted through the Counsel's Office prior to those sorts of sessions happening? What sort of oversight was done within the White House?

Perino: Yes, generally -- because it's not unlawful and it wasn't unusual for informational briefings to be given. They were run by Sara Taylor and Scott Jennings.

Reporter: But there's a higher standard, obviously, at the White House than no laws were broken. Aren't there ethical questions, as well?

Perino: There were no -- what ethical (rules) would have been broken?

Reporter: No, in terms of using federal resources, federal people to encourage people. The allegation is out there that people were being encouraged to help Republicans.

Reporter #2: And targeting certain Democrats --

Perino: There is no prohibition under the Hatch Act of allowing political appointees to talk to other political appointees about the political landscape in which they are trying to advance the President's agenda. None.

Reporter: You say it's not a violation of the Hatch Act.

Perino: Not a violation of law, or of ethics.

Reporter: So why is the Office of Special Counsel investigating it, if you're still saying that it's clearly fine, why would they be investigating?

Perino: You'll have to ask them. You'll have to ask them.

For starters the Hatch Act doesn't talk about political appointees. It talks about employees who may engage in partisan political activities and those who can't. Political appointees can engage in partisan political activities, but their participation is limited. A publication of the Office of Special Counsel says they may not

*use official authority or influence to interfere with an election
*solicit or discourage political activity of anyone with business before their agency
*solicit or receive political contributions (may be done in certain limited situations by federal labor or other employee organizations)
*be candidates for public office in partisan elections
*engage in political activity while:
on duty
in a government office
wearing an official uniform
using a government vehicle
wear partisan political buttons on duty

These briefings were given at government offices. That they were more than informational was clearly established at the Doan hearing last month. You can see the video here. A legal memo from The Congressional Research Service on the issue is clear. Political activities may not be conducted by any Federal employee while on duty or at a government office. I guess if you look a little like Cameron Diaz you think you can lie and reporters will believe you. The Special Counsel might not conduct a real investigation of this mess, but a real investigation is warranted.

Update: I was not entirely accurate when I said political activities may not be conducted by any Federal employee while on duty or at a government office. The Hatch Act does allow the President and Vice President, certain Presidential aids and a limited number of political employees (generally cabinet officers or others whose appointment was confirmed by the Senate)to participate in political activities while on duty or at government facilities. However, most of the political employees attending Parino's coffee clatches were not members of the limited class. Moreover, criminal penalties apply to supervisors who are overtly coercive in demanding subordinate Federal empolyees participate in political activities. 18 USC 610. If Doan said to her suborinates, "You will attend the Scott Jennings brown bag" that statement might be considered a command and she might be liable criminally.

There's more: "Shorter Dana Perino-The Hatch Act Doesn't Apply To Republicans" >>

Karl Rove's Shop Conducted Briefings At 15 Agencies

The Washington Post's R. Jeffrey Smith reports that last year Karl Rove's office

conducted 20 private briefings on Republican electoral prospects in the last midterm election for senior officials in at least 15 government agencies covered by federal restrictions on partisan political activity, a White House spokesman and other administration officials said yesterday.

The previously undisclosed briefings were part of what now appears to be a regular effort in which the White House sent senior political officials to brief top appointees in government agencies on which seats Republican candidates might win or lose, and how the election outcomes could affect the success of administration policies, the officials said.

As you may recall earlier this month the Office of General Counsel launched an investigation into allegations that General Services Administration chief Lurita Doan violated the Hatch Act by conducting one such briefing at her agency.

Of course, Doan is but another sad victim of partial memory loss epidemic among loyal Bushies appearing before Congress. Known as "Alberto Gonzales' Disease" this terrible malady affects loyal Bushies like Doan, D. Kyle Sampson, and Gonzales who have had recent contact with Karl Rove and J. Scott Jennings. This tragic disease targets the memories of otherwise normal public officials depriving them of the ability to recall events occurring during their official duties.

There's more: "Karl Rove's Shop Conducted Briefings At 15 Agencies" >>

This Story Is Moving At Warp Speed

One of the problems for the White House is that the documents dumped Monday are being viewed not only by reporters and house and senate investigators, but by lots and lots of bloggers. Details that in the old days would have been overlooked or ignored are catching the eye of some pretty savvy people. Among the items that has been caught by the eagle eyed is White House political aide Scott Jennings' use of an email account provided by the RNC when communicating with Kyle Sampson. Jennings is a White House employee. He used the RNC account while communicating with an official at the Justice Department. According to a complaint filed today with the house oversight committee CREW That might be an violation of the Presidential Records Act. Unless the White House is going to argue that Jennings work in the prosecutor purge was purely political, CREW might be right.

There's more: "This Story Is Moving At Warp Speed" >>