HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Ortiz on the hot seat-U.S...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:02 AM

Ortiz on the hot seat-U.S. attorney facing Congressional scrutiny


Ortiz on the hot seat
U.S. attorney facing Congressional scrutiny


The Justice Department is scrambling to answer pointed inquiries from a congressional committee about U.S. Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz’s prosecution of Internet whiz Aaron Swartz, raising the specter of a brutal Beltway hearing that could call her judgment into question as she pursues high-profile cases, including her Probation 
Department probe.

The Justice Department yesterday met a deadline to set a briefing date with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform — the same bipartisan panel that held Ortiz’s boss, Attorney General Eric Holder, in contempt of Congress last year for what it said was failure to comply with its probe of the “Fast and Furious” gun-tracking fiasco.

“We have been in discussions with the committee and plan to conduct a briefing,” a DOJ official told the Herald yesterday.

Congressional scrutiny will likely raise the heat on Ortiz after the Swartz tragedy and as she looks to bring Beacon Hill power brokers to trial on patronage hiring in the Probation Department.

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/02/ortiz_hot_seat

9 replies, 1075 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply Ortiz on the hot seat-U.S. attorney facing Congressional scrutiny (Original post)
The Straight Story Feb 2013 OP
Jumping John Feb 2013 #1
The Straight Story Feb 2013 #2
Jumping John Feb 2013 #3
The Straight Story Feb 2013 #4
Jumping John Feb 2013 #5
The Straight Story Feb 2013 #6
Jumping John Feb 2013 #7
The Straight Story Feb 2013 #8
Jumping John Feb 2013 #9

Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:37 AM

1. I see that the WH has not responded to

 

the petition to remove Ortiz even though twice the number of requirwd signers have signed to generate a response and even though it is before the deadline date.

51,000 plus people have signed.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-states-district-attorney-carmen-ortiz-office-overreach-case-aaron-swartz/RQNrG1Ck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jumping John (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:39 AM

2. They raised it to 100,000 :

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/white-house-raises-petition-signature-requirement-100-000-140741862--politics.html

White House raises petition signature requirement to 100,000

In what seems to be an effort to curb time spent on outrageous petitions, the White House late Tuesday quadrupled the signature threshold for "We the People" petitions to 100,000.

Thank goodness we got an answer on the Death Star before the new rule took effect.

Previously, 25,000 signatures were required to garner an official response from the White House on a petition posted at the "We the People" website.

Macon Phillips, White House director of digital strategy, wrote in a blog post that the decision was a direct response to the booming popularity of the "We the People" site:

When we first raised the threshold—from 5,000 to 25,000—we called it "a good problem to have." Turns out that "good problem" is only getting better, so we're making another adjustment to ensure we’re able to continue to give the most popular ideas the time they deserve.

The 25,000 signature limit meant the White House was directed to give official responses to bizarre petitions such as one to build the Death Star. (White House response: "No.")

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:57 AM

3. The Ortiz petition and the petitions already in place before the rule change for the number of

 

signers required for a WH response remains at a total of 25,000 and not the higher number.

If you would take the time to do a little research at the site of the Ortiz petition you will see:

"Signatures needed by February 11, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 0"

Or maybe you are saying that the WH's petition people are liars?


That is a catchy little user name (the straight story) you have, But it is not appropriate unless it is accurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jumping John (Reply #3)


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:04 AM

5. Here is the info so there is no confusion:

 

The White House reserves the right to change the time limits and signature thresholds and apply them to petitions created after the change has been published to this “Current thresholds” section:

AS OF JANUARY 15, 2013:

To cross the first threshold and be searchable within WhiteHouse.gov, a petition must reach 150 signatures within 30 days.

To cross the second threshold and require a response, a petition must reach 100,000 signatures within 30 days.

The Terms of Participation were updated on January 15, 2013. View our Terms of Participation Archive page to see the previous version


https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/how-why/terms-participation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jumping John (Reply #5)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:06 AM

6. Indeed, but also note (and they do not need 100,000) from the petition

Signatures needed by February 11, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000

So I doubt it will be replied to until after that date.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #6)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:12 AM

7. The criteria for a response is the number of signers and not the date. And the number has been

 

reached. And if you can post any evidence that supports your opinion about the date please do.

Even the WH admits that the response is required and met if the number required is reached within 30 days.

So that would seem to be a cutoff date more for not responding than for responding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jumping John (Reply #7)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:21 AM

8. Right, they did reach the correct number (and I hope the WH does reply), but

"To avoid the appearance of improper influence, the White House may decline to address certain procurement, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or similar matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local government in its response to a petition. "

"The White House may elect to respond to petitions at any time, including those that have not crossed the first or second threshold."

And as noted in the OP, congress is now looking into this matter...so we may never get a reply (but you are correct on the dates, thank you for pointing out that)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #8)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:29 AM

9. Yes - even though the right to petition the government is written into the

 

constitution - it is not a right that the federal government is required to recognize as important as the government does what the government thinks is best for the government and not the country and her people.

The most important thing to recognize is that Aaron Swartz was hounded by the massive DOJ who cared not much for a young man and his citizenship in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread