Holder Discusses Stevens Case Debacle For First Time

For the first time since the Department of Justice dismissed corruption charges against former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, Attorney General Eric Holder is taking questions on the topic.

In an exclusive sit-down with CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric airing tonight, the attorney general brushed off claims that his department "dragged its feet" in dealing with the case, but said that Justice officials involved in the botched prosecution won't be fired if a review turns up no wrongdoing.

A key excerpt below:

KATIE COURIC: He suggested that the department has dragged its feet, looking into the misconduct.

ERIC HOLDER: No, I don't think anybody can say that, given the fact that, in this limited time that I've been-- attorney general, I looked at the case, decided that mistakes had been made. And made the determination that the case had to be dismissed, looking at the totality of the circumstances. I've only been-- attorney general for a little over eight weeks now. I don't think that anybody can say that this department has dragged its feet.

KATIE COURIC: You're reportedly close to the lead prosecutor, Brenda Morris, who's under investigation for failing, among other things, to disclose crucial information to defense lawyers in this case. Another target of the investigation is, apparently, William Welch, who's head of the office, ironically, of public integrity. Will you fire either one of them? Will they stay on during the course of these investigations?

ERIC HOLDER: Unless there's some basis for me to decide if they have something wrong-- they'll remain in place.

The Alaska Republican Party and Gov. Sarah Palin have both called on Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) to resign, providing an opportunity for Stevens to, at the very least, run in a special election for his old seat.

In a recent editorial, the New York Times praised Holder's handling of the Stevens case, describing it as a decisive break from the partisanship of the Bush era:

Mr. Holder, whose department is continuing to investigate the Stevens prosecution, now needs to determine whether the prosecutors’ conduct was so egregious that they should face their own ethics charges.

He should not stop with this case. Don Siegelman, the former governor of Alabama, and Paul Minor, a prominent Mississippi trial lawyer, have charged that Justice Department prosecutors engaged in unethical behavior in cases that led to their convictions. Both men claim that they were singled out for prosecution because of their affiliation with the Democratic Party.

Given the flagrant partisanship of the Bush Justice Department, it is especially reassuring to see Mr. Holder ignore party lines to do the right thing by Mr. Stevens. It has been far too long since the attorney general seemed interested in enforcing ethics and nonpartisanship in a department that has been shockingly lacking in both.

Part two of Couric's interview airs Wednesday night on the "CBS Evening News." Topics include Mexico, gun control, Guantanamo Bay, and Dick Cheney's recent comments.

Comments

[Grant Morrison]

..

WHERE'S the CHANGE? It's in our POCKETS.

Let's make a list.

Iraq...NOTHING. Afganistan...MORE. Investigating Bush subverting the Constituti­on...NOTHI­NG. Warrentless wiretaps...NOTHING. Medical marijuana.­.....TOKEN statements, but the DEA continues the War. State Secrets....MORE.

Where's the change?

Oh, from Republican to Democrat. Change the name, keep the GAME.

.

[epochme]

get your lying a** off of the tv and get on with throwing the banksters in jail , congratulations you let one of the country club members off the hook ... big surprise ... the more things change ... the more they stay the same

[bayside]

The pros. in this case were appointees from the bush administration, the one cleaning it up is a dem..I expect holder will continue and clean up the justice dept. ,dem. or republican ,and that is the way it should be..

[DSchoen]

“The pros. in this case were appointees from the bush administration"

None of these prosecutors are the “politically appointed”, these are the “career type” prosecutors.

William Welch is was mentioned as a possible candidate for the U.S. attorney job in Massachusetts, that would have made him a “politically appointed type” of the Obama admin.
Brenda Morris was mentioned in an article about big time Obama supporters

“Big Donors Will Still Get Some Sweet Embassy Spots”

That’s Brenda Morris, the one that Couric pointed out was “close to” Holder.

“You're reportedly close to the lead prosecutor, Brenda Morris, who's under investigation for failing, among other things, to disclose crucial information to defense lawyers in this case,”

He may not fire them but its easy to understand why The Obama admin WILL NOT appoint William Welch to be the US Attorney for Massachusetts.

Senator Kennedy had been pushing for that.

Hint: that WOULD be a political appointment.

And Brenda Morris, ya know the one that’s “close to” Eric Holder will not be getting an US Attorney political appointment nor will she Get “Some Sweet Embassy Spots”
In fact if ya wanted to make a “political” case out of this it is obvious that these 2 have MAJOR ties to Obama.

Obama NEEDS 60 seats in the Senate.

Prosecutors KNOWINGLY used bogus evidence, bogus testimony AND withheld evidence that could prove Stevens innocent.

AG Holders actions in this case appear to be “CYA” as opposed to “doing the right thing”

[bfern]

Mr. Holder might want to consider investigating the conduct of the federal prosecutors in Puerto Rico, as related to the recent acquittal of ex-governor Acevedo-Vila. The governor was charged with baseless corruption charges just a few months before the election. This had the effect of causing him to lose to Luis Fortuno, who had helped the prosecutor into the post. There was no evidence during the trial, which caused the defense to forgo even presenting any witnesses. He was acquitted unanimously by a jury after less than 3 hours of deliberation. The governor was destroyed because the federal justice system was used to 'get him'. The public faith in the system has also been destroyed in Puerto Rico.

[duze]

Give it time something else is going on. Truly the whole story or reasons why haven't been revealked. Let's all take a deep breath and wait and see.

[Destin]

You guys still waiting on that 17 day miracle that you said Pelosi was promising? I knew that was fake the minute I saw it, and I called everyone out about it. And what happened? Nobody ever impeached Bush. Nobody has even investigated Bush. And you know what? Nobody ever will.

So keep on dreaming that 17 day miracle that you never got. Yeah, we picked up more seats in 2008, just like you guys wanted. But now that you got that majority to impeach, Pelosi took it off the table. Fools to believe in that stuff. You'd be even more foolish to think that there's more to be revealed. It's already been revealed that this was all a setup.

[rsaillant1]

Duze, I agree.

But, while were breathing deeply, let's keep in mind that it was the
Bush prosecution that seems to have failed the system. This case
and the suspected mishandling occured within the Bush reign.....
oh yeah, 9-11 too.

[Scar1]

.

Leadership
The Office of Policy is led by the Director of the Office of Policy, Susan Cullen.

Mission
The mission of the Office of Policy is to identify, develop, and effectively communicate ICE’s organizational priorities and policies.

Vision Statement
The Office of Policy will build on its solid record of client service, further developing and promoting its research and information service to enhance ICE’s performance and reputation. The Office will continue to seek out opportunities to support ICE’s mission and improve ICE efficiencies and effectiveness.

Core Values
The core values of the Office of Policy are those established by the Assistant Secretary of ICE: Duty, Respect, Innovation, Vigilance, and Excellence.

Goals
Maintain an independent, objective, and effective policy analysis capability within ICE that supports the ICE mission;
Identify, develop, and disseminate operational and administrative policy through the use of formal structures and processes;
Provide ICE leadership with sound technical advice on broad policy matters while simultaneously ensuring that the ICE law enforcement and homeland security perspective is fully represented and promoted in DHS and national policy forums;
Prepare issue papers on substantive areas of ICE concern that address and propose resolution on policy problems in selected areas;
Design, oversee, and implement strategic policy processes that provide ICE-wide strategic direction;
Build constructive relationships with internal ICE Offices, DHS, and key community stakeholders to foster community understanding of and support for the ICE mission; and
Assist senior managers in the formulation, revision, and analysis of procedures, policies, and directives.

[Scar1]

287GNow this is too general and gives too much authority without training and supervision in the field. It is like the term: "Probable Cause" and that has been taken to the extreme to the point of foolishness. Policy 287G opens one up to misuse and racial and subjective profiling.

So, to Lou Dobbs, Al Sharpton and Acorn this does need reform and better guidelines and instruction to avoid any misunderstanding under the law.

[Beninn]

Why isn't this news story headlining this website?

Obama Government Opts For Secrecy in Wiretap Suit -

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/06/MNRP16TJOQ.DTL

Obama's a fraud.

[Shikamaru]

You dolt, this was implemented in 2001 (Under Bush...you're acting as if Obama passed the legislation), you don't have any details beyond that article. Do you honestly think he could want in and say, "This has to stop." and the NSA/FBI/CIA/ATF ... or anyone involved would listen? How is it, you feel justified in trying to spin things which shouldn't be spun?

[twofish]

Palin and the Rethugs can go pound sand about Mark Begich resigning. He won fair and square. Unless you think the DOJ pursuit of Stevens was a Democratic plot to get a Democrat elected. Actually, maybe these noodles have talked themselves into believing that.

[kkent]

No only you did.

[judykaren]

Wonder if the prosecutors came from Liberty University?

[TotalRecall9]

Enforcing ethics? Highly dubious!

Where's the prosecution against the fraudsters in the banks, ratings agencies, lenders, brokers, and crooked regulators that caused this financial crisis?

Where's the prosecution of the Bush Administration for torture, false imprisonment, and unwarranted wiretaps?

Why not fire unethical prosecutors?

There is a bad odor of corruption coming from the Treasury Department and Justice Department already!

[Beninn]

Look at what Holder did yesterday and why isn't this news story headlining this website?

Obama Government Opts For Secrecy in Wiretap Suit -

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/06/MNRP16TJOQ.DTL

Obama wants to expand on what Bush did with the telecomms, and eviscerate citizens' privacy protections. Even Jonathan Turley and Keith Olbermann are condemning Obama and saying that there's no mistaking Obama's intentions anymore.

Obama's a fraud.

[Nonpartay]

Please stop spamming the HP. I think we got the message.

[Shikamaru]

Quit Spamming, we already understand that you possess a limited mental capacity to grasp the big picture. By posting this you only prove your ignorance. I read the article, please tell me exactly which paragraph mistranslated in your head to make you believe as you do? Then I'll try to explain it at the level of a 2nd grader so you understand.

[cbates]

No one should be allowed to listen in on our conversations nor should they intercept our communications. We do have a right to privacy. This is illegal and should be fought tooth and nail.

[DrPneumann]

Obama adminstration DOJ taking Bush's assault on American civil liberties even further:

Late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's first response to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope -- never before advanced even by the Bush administration -- that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

In other words, beyond even the outrageously broad "state secrets" privilege invented by the Bush administration and now embraced fully by the Obama administration, the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and -- even if what they're doing is blatantly illegal and they know it's illegal -- you are barred from suing them unless they "willfully disclose" to the public what they have learned.

http://crooksandliars.com/

[ErikW65]

Here's a link to that breaking news story about the Obama Admin backpedaling on FISA again:

New Obama DOJ claims sovereign immunity in wiretap case
An ancient, unwritten principle that the Constitution itself failed to waive, is the basis for a Justice Dept. petition to dismiss a FISA-related civil suit.
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published April 7, 2009, 5:21 PM

http://www.betanews.com/article/New-Obama-DOJ-claims-sovereign-immunity-in-wiretap-case/1239139317

[darthmaul]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't this prosecution happen under the Bush administration? It's funny that you don't see the republicans like Palin, saying how badly the Bush JD handled this. Just another, in a lone line, of Bush's messes that the Obama administration has to clean up.

[kkent]

Manson, jim jones member!

[Lochmon]

Much that the Obama administration is doing I disagree with. Privacy concerns for individual citizens are near the top of a list of things I think this administration is backwards on. This is eating at me, seeing the administration I support opposite from the position I think they should be taking.

Nevertheless, I advise everyone the same thing I tell try to tell myself... wait and see.

There's a lot of wiggle room for Obama to continue certain specific Bush policies that were bad, previously used to harm, that we can take a wait and see attitude about.

It's called "buying time".

It's (hopefully) a recognition that, yes, there's a limit to how much can be done at once. It's continuing policies that this administration doesn't necessarily believe in, but sees as issues to be taken up later. Just because the administration's reserving the right to burn you doesn't mean they'll burn you. Maybe they will, or maybe it's all just too much at once, and some issues must wait. So... we wait and see.

Older posters remember how, once upon a time, presidents had a 100-day "honeymoon" to begin putting policies in place, before really heavy-duty criticism began. Obama never got that kind of grace period. As of April 7, we're still only 77 days in. Eleven weeks.

OK, maybe Obama wants to have you wire-tapped. Or maybe Obama doesn't, and will revisit the issue at a later date.

Time will tell. Wait and see.

[joebloe]

This is how I have been feeling about some aspects of the Obama administration. I too have to remember that we are onlly at the beginning and should have patience. It is frustrating, though, after 7 1/2 years of illegal activities to not see it reversed immediately.

[meede]

There are webs they have to untangle as they weave their way through these things that Bush put in place. Therefore keeping it in place for now so to work their way through it as it was in place for years and it has only been 8 weeks Holder in office. He too has a lot on his plate.

I agree -- wait and see.