[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6598-6599]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        FIRING OF U.S. ATTORNEYS

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, in today's Congressional Weekly, a respected 
publication we get back there, there is a column on the last page by 
Craig Crawford which I think is quite illuminating. It is entitled 
``The Firing Squad Backfires.''

       The fingerprints of the President's top advisers are all 
     over the prosecutors' firing scandal, which means trouble for 
     Bush.

  Here is the first sentence:

       Of all the scandals that increasingly bedevil George W. 
     Bush's Presidency, none has more direct ties to the President 
     than the flap over firing Federal prosecutors.

  I rise today to express my strong support of S. 214, Senator 
Feinstein's legislation to strengthen the independence of U.S. 
attorneys. There is growing evidence that the Bush administration fired 
Federal prosecutors for improper partisan reasons. This legislation is 
needed to protect the integrity of the Federal criminal justice system 
and the autonomy of the chief Federal prosecutors across the country.
  The U.S. attorney scandal is another example of the arrogance of 
power. As Lord Acton said, power tends to corrupt, and absolute power 
tends to corrupt absolutely. For too long, the Bush administration--
shielded from oversight by a Republican-dominated Congress--enjoyed 
absolute power, and they abused it.
  After all, this was a President who won two elections by the barest 
of margins, first by the Supreme Court. Yet after 9/11, instead of 
uniting the country, he has chosen to push the envelope of his 
authority. On everything from the runup to the war in Iraq, to the plan 
to destroy Social Security, to the use of warrantless wiretapping, this 
administration has governed without compromise.
  The political purge of U.S. attorneys is only the latest example of 
this President's unhealthy disregard for checks and balances. Speedy 
passage of this bill is only the first step the Senate must take to 
deal with the administration's dangerous power grab.
  We need to get to the bottom of this scandal to find out why these 
U.S. attorneys were fired. We need to find out whether the Attorney 
General and his deputies testified truthfully when they first explained 
the firings to Congress and the American people.
  Federal prosecutors are enormously powerful individuals. They are the 
embodiment of Federal criminal law. They make life-and-death decisions 
about who to prosecute and who should receive leniency. Their 
discretion is largely unreviewable. They must be permitted to carry out 
their solemn duties without any political interference.
  No one disputes the authority of the President to name U.S. attorneys 
at the beginning of his term, subject to the advice and consent of the 
Senate. But it is unprecedented that U.S. attorneys be terminated in 
the middle of a Presidential term without proper cause. It is 
unacceptable for U.S. attorneys to be replaced because they were 
perceived by the White House to be insufficiently partisan or too 
aggressive in prosecuting public corruption.
  It appears that administration officials took advantage of a 
provision that they insisted be included in the PATRIOT Act 
reauthorization conference report last year. Now it is becoming clear 
why they stuck that provision in there. This was a plan they had for 
some time. That law reversed a longstanding procedure that allowed the 
chief Federal judge in the Federal district court to appoint a 
temporary replacement while the permanent nominee undergoes Senate 
confirmation. The Feinstein bill simply restores the pre-PATRIOT Act 
procedure.
  Conflicting testimony and recently released e-mails strongly suggest 
the American people are not getting from the Bush administration the 
full story about this scandal.
  In the State of Nevada, as an example, Daniel Bogden, a highly 
respected career prosecutor, was forced to step down. His chosen 
vocation in life was to be a Federal prosecutor. He worked as an 
assistant U.S. attorney for a significant period of time before chosen 
to be the U.S. attorney by a Republican, John Ensign, and by the 
President, who sent his name to us. We were initially told that Bogden 
and others were fired for ``performance-related reasons.'' But that 
explanation proved to be totally bogus. In fact, Dan Bogden's personnel 
review was glowing. We still don't know why Dan Bogden was fired. What 
we do know is under the new PATRIOT Act provision, Mr. Bogden could be 
replaced by someone with no ties to Nevada, and with no input from the 
Senate. The damage done to Bogden personally is irreparable. He can't 
work now as assistant U.S. attorney. That is part of the process. That 
is too bad. He is a fine man whose reputation has been besmirched.
  Meanwhile, we learned of a scheme hatched in the White House to 
replace all U.S. attorneys. At least one U.S. attorney has stated he 
was forced to resign because he refused to bend to political pressure 
regarding ongoing investigations. Others were fired under

[[Page 6599]]

circumstances that raise the same question. In the State of Arkansas, 
the U.S. attorney was fired and replaced by one of Karl Rove's 
underlings.
  The Attorney General and his deputies told Congress these firings 
were not politically motivated. But according to newly released e-
mails, White House political operatives such as Mr. Rove were involved 
in the decisionmaking. Kyl Sampson, who eventually became Chief of 
Staff to Attorney General Gonzales, wrote an e-mail that distinguished 
between those U.S. attorneys who were ``loyal Bushies'' and those who 
were not. Dan Bogden and other U.S. attorneys who were fired last 
December were not ``loyal Bushies.''
  What I am worried about--and it hasn't come out yet--is what about 
those who were loyal Bushies? Were these people prosecuting people 
because of the political involvement of the White House? Perhaps so.
  The real question is whether being a ``loyal Bushie'' meant letting 
partisan consideration poison law enforcement decisions. Do prosecutors 
who are ``loyal Bushies'' go easy on Republican corruption? Do they 
bring cases against Democrats without legal justification? The actions 
of the Bush administration call into question every decision by Federal 
prosecutors in corruption cases across the country.
  I applaud the efforts of Senator Feinstein, who wrote this 
legislation and spoke about it early on. I also applaud the efforts of 
Senators Schumer and Leahy, as well as colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle who are committed to getting the truth in this matter. I 
strongly urge the Senate to pass this piece of legislation. Simply put, 
we need to begin to keep politics out of the Federal criminal justice 
system, which is the way it has always been.

                          ____________________