Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT-(Hillman)Prosecutor Will Step Down From Lobbyist Case

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 AM
Original message
NYT-(Hillman)Prosecutor Will Step Down From Lobbyist Case
WASHINGTON, Jan. 26 — The investigation of Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist, took a surprising new turn on Thursday when the Justice Department said the chief prosecutor in the inquiry would step down next week because he had been nominated to a federal judgeship by President Bush.

The prosecutor, Noel L. Hillman, is chief of the department's public integrity division, and the move ends his involvement in an inquiry that has reached into the administration as well as the top ranks of the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

The administration said that the appointment was routine and that it would not affect the investigation, but Democrats swiftly questioned the timing of the move and called for a special prosecutor.

The announcement came as Mr. Bush faced a barrage of questions about why he would not make public "grip-and-grin" photographs of him with Mr. Abramoff. The photographs apparently show Mr. Bush and Mr. Abramoff smiling at White House Hanukkah parties and Republican fund-raising receptions.

more:http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/politics/27judge.html?_r=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 06:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. We will have to watch his replacement VERY carefully..
(Do you think B*sh's boys expected him to NOT step down?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 06:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. It'll just be another bush appointed crony...........
he's purged the judicial of anyone not on "the team". Or maybe the White House will investigate itself, again. They're very good at that. Strange, they never seem to find any evidence of wrong-doing either! Imagine that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 06:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. Same thing happened when they were investigating him in Marianas too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Except that prosecutor was transferred out.
This one is getting a federal judgeship. He must have deep sixed something and is being rewarded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes, but this isn't about Hillman.
It's about his replacement.
(My opinion.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. Just a coincidence--nothing to see here--move along.
Yeah right.

Who'll he replace this guy with? Harriet Miers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sattahipdeep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 06:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. Just one of many "interchangeable characters"
Bush Says Photos With Disgraced Lobbyist Are 'Not Relevant'

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AzDar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
7. Truly alarming that they aren't even worried about the transparency
of their f*&king corruption anymore....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
9. Good job Dems. Keep the process honest, because you know
Edited on Fri Jan-27-06 09:09 AM by The Backlash Cometh
the Republicans plan to taint any investigation to achieve their ends, just like they did with the Ken Starr investigation.

How can that man sleep at night?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. There was nothing else they could do, but losing Hillman is bad for Dems
He was recommended by dems from his state for judgeship last year. Bush moved now, I suspect, because he knew the guy was decent and would step down- he is, after all, elbow deep in this productive investigation.

Bush purposefully tainted Hillman, imo, so he could replace him with his own Starr-like hack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Curses. I hadn't realized it was a chess move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #11
56. This is interesting; Hillman got the NH phone jamming case moving-
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007549.php

Noel L. Hillman is the Chief of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Division. Both on paper and in reality he's been the one heading up the Abramoff investigation for the last two years.

He's stepping down next week because President Bush just nominated him for a federal judgeship.

So we have the obvious question. Is he being escorted aside to put a damper on the investigation?

You can draw your inferences as well as I can. But there is one bit of hard information that gives me real cause for concern.

Go back to that New Hampshire phone-jamming case we're always talking about. Until the middle of 2004, the Justice Department seemed to be doing everything it could to drag its heels on the case. There were even some fairly tangible and specific signs of political interference in the case.

Then the case was reassigned to the Public Integrity Division, under Hillman, and things changed on a dime. The prosecution become much more serious and aggressive.

Once an investigation is this far-flung, with so many career prosecutors and FBI agents involved, it's not easy to shut it down. But warning it away from the big players is by no means impossible. And I'd be much more confident in the integrity of the investigation with Hillman still at the helm than without him.

So is there reason for concern? I'd say, yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #10
52. Exactly...
There is no other reason in the world why ** would advance this nomination by Democrats a year after the recommendation was made unless he felt the guy was getting too close. I can't think of another time when he's taken any democrat's recommendation about anything. This is really bullshit and amazingly transparent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LearnedHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. NYT: Prosecutor Will Step Down From Lobbyist Case
Of COURSE, this nomination has NOTHING to do with the Abramoff/Delay/Congress connections... :sarcasm:


================== ARTICLE BELOW =================

WASHINGTON, Jan. 26 — The investigation of Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist, took a surprising new turn on Thursday when the Justice Department said the chief prosecutor in the inquiry would step down next week because he had been nominated to a federal judgeship by President Bush.

The prosecutor, Noel L. Hillman, is chief of the department's public integrity division, and the move ends his involvement in an inquiry that has reached into the administration as well as the top ranks of the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

The administration said that the appointment was routine and that it would not affect the investigation, but Democrats swiftly questioned the timing of the move and called for a special prosecutor.

The announcement came as Mr. Bush faced a barrage of questions about why he would not make public "grip-and-grin" photographs of him with Mr. Abramoff. The photographs apparently show Mr. Bush and Mr. Abramoff smiling at White House Hanukkah parties and Republican fund-raising receptions.

<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/politics/27judge.html?ei=5065&en=c43d49ebb56ff6c5&ex=1139029200&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&adxnnlx=1138377932-+VosC3tOIR+1Em3f0KS8Wg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. bah! grip-and-grin is the perfect description.
"here, hold this."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. INDEPENDENT/SPECIAL PROSECUTOR
That's what is called for here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. This illustrates why the Abramoff thing is a joke.
Please.. .the prosecutor in this is NOW nominated to be a Federal Judge? By BUSH? That tells me two things... 1) Bush wants him out of the investigation to muddy up things and throw the investigation into disarray. 2) He's a partisan hack anyway, otherwise Bush would never have selected him for a judgeship.

First Bush gives NORQUIST'S brother a cushy appointment the other day (Norquist, Abramoff's bestest pal), and now this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LearnedHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. EXACTLY! But, but, but...
...the White House insists the nomination is NOT related. Now I realize there's a very common logical fallacy where we assume, because something occurs close on the heels of something else, the two are related. But after this administration's* record, I no longer believe it's a logical fallacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hughee99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. If he's really a partisan hack...
why wouldn't * leave him on the investigation to whitewash things? Is it possible that he wasn't willing to play ball so they offered him a judgeship to get him out of the way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #17
53. That's what I think.
This neuters the prosecutor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonhomme Richard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. It's all about his career.
Either he stays with the case, prosecutes aggressively and make a name/career for himself after being attacked ruthlessly or...............he gets offered a once in a lifetime job opportunity. It's a no brainer, and at the same time he gets an ethical pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Original message
Prosecutor Will Step Down from (Abramoff) Lobbyist Case
By Philip Shenon and Elisabeth Bumiller
The New York Times

Friday 27 January 2006

Washington - The investigation of Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist, took a surprising new turn on Thursday when the Justice Department said the chief prosecutor in the inquiry would step down next week because he had been nominated to a federal judgeship by President Bush.

The prosecutor, Noel L. Hillman, is chief of the department's public integrity division, and the move ends his involvement in an inquiry that has reached into the administration as well as the top ranks of the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

The administration said that the appointment was routine and that it would not affect the investigation, but Democrats swiftly questioned the timing of the move and called for a special prosecutor.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012706J.shtml

HOLY SHIT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AverageJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
19. Holy Crap
Could these bastards be any more transparent with their corruption?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrZeeLit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
20. Nothing.... NOTHING....NOTH-ING surprises me any more, if it ever did...
with these people... I use the term "people" loosely.

Kinda reminds me of NIxon and the Friday Night Massacre.... who was that judge.
Wait a minute... it will come to me.

Let's just hope this goes the way of Watergate, huh?

I wonder what they offered Fitgerald that he turned down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
21. I am numb n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
22. Obstruction of Justice
You fascist motherfuckers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrangeCountyDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
23. Chief Of Public Integrity Division?
I almost lost it when I read this. Integrity of what exactly? LOL. We're All Fucking Doomed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
24. My head is exploding. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrotherBuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
25. Got to stall this thing until after midterms
Timing is everything. You know what I mean, Vern?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
26. Just when you think they've gone as far as they dare go
...the criminals in Bushworld go one step farther. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
27. Abramoff doesn't release photos and prosecutor gets promoted...
Hmmm, funny how that works, huh?

How does that saying go? quid pro quo.

scumbags.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
28. Bush also removed prosecutor from Abramoff investigation in Guam in 2002:
Bush removal ended Guam investigation
US attorney's demotion halted probe of lobbyist

By Walter F. Roche Jr., Los Angeles Times | August 8, 2005

WASHINGTON -- A US grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor, and the probe ended soon after.

The previously undisclosed Guam inquiry is separate from a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia that is investigating allegations that Abramoff bilked Indian tribes out of millions of dollars.

In Guam, a US territory in the Pacific, investigators were looking into Abramoff's secret arrangement with Superior Court officials to lobby against a court reform bill then pending in Congress. The legislation, since approved, gave the Guam Supreme Court authority over the Superior Court.


snip

Abramoff spokesman Andrew Blum said the lobbyist ''has no recollection of his being investigated in Guam in 2002. If he had been aware of an investigation, he would have cooperated fully." Blum declined to respond to detailed questions.

The transactions were the target of a grand jury subpoena issued Nov. 18, 2002, according to the subpoena. It demanded that Anthony Sanchez, administrative director of the Guam Superior Court, turn over all records involving the lobbying contract, including bills and payments.

A day later, the chief prosecutor, US Attorney Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.


The timing caught some by surprise. Despite his officially temporary status as the acting US attorney, Black had held the assignment for more than a decade.

snip

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/08/08/bush_removal_ended_guam_investigation/?p1=email_to_a_friend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
29. HEH HEH HEH bushitler you creep! Even this stoop is
is not gona help you. HEH HEH HEH
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
30. How CON-veeeeenient !!!!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
31. There was an OP shortly after the Abramoff scandal broke that
talked about this! DU was way ahead of the ball yet again! Unfortunately I can't search for it due to being at Level 1 but will try when the search feature is available again.

I am not surprised, disgusted but not surprised.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
38. By any chance is this the one you're thinking of?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #38
43. Yes, that could have been it! I thought the issue came up earlier
than that date but with so much happening so quickly it may have just seemed that way. Thanks for the link!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClayZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
32. I guess they think nobody is watching,
Edited on Fri Jan-27-06 04:07 PM by ClayZ
and there is not a ton of bricks. (figuratively speaking)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democraticinsurgent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
33. Replacement: Scott McLellan's Brother!
According to Joe Conason on the Al Franken Show about an hour ago.

What a coincidence.

And the corruption just gets bolder by the day...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Are you sh*ttin' me?
McLellan's brother? For real?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democraticinsurgent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. need confirmation on this
I just heard Conason say it. I went to Salon to read his column, which was about Abramoff, but no mention of the McLellan nomination.

So it needs to be checked. I HOPE it's not true. Or maybe I hope it is true. One more embarassment for the regime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. Maybe he was making a joke,
just like Bush nominated his personal lawyer for SCOTUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #33
49. Andrew Lourie will be handling the case
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #33
50. A guy named Andrew Lourie. No dirt on him that I see.
Edited on Fri Jan-27-06 05:34 PM by onenote
Despite all the caterwauling, I don't see any basis for concluding that Hillman's replacement, Andrew Lourie, will be a step down from Hillman in any way or will have any adverse impact on the investigation. Andrew Lourie is the Managing Assistant United States Attorney in the West Palm Beach Office of the United States Attorney's Office. He is responsible for supervising the West Palm Beach branch office. Lourie is a career guy who started out as an associate at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, New York, New York in the late 1980s. He began working for the United States Attorney's Office, District of New Jersey Assistant U.S. Attorney in July 1991. And in 1994 he entered the Economic Crimes Section, to become the Deputy Chief in 1998. In June 2000, Mr. Lourie became the Chief of Major Crimes Section. Prior to coming to the West Palm Beach office in 2002, Andrew Lourie was the Chief of the Public Integrity Section of the United States Department of Justice, Criminal Division in Washington, D.C.

onenote
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
36. Sweet Jesus....
My head just blew up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HootieMcBoob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
37. Not a peep about this in the liberal media
Why isn't Leslie Blitzer covering this? I don't understand....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. So far it's in the NY Times, the San Francisco Chronicle...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #41
55. It was the lead-in on Hardball
with the guest's head exploding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. Great! I would have loved to seen that. Who was the guest? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. I'm sorry, I didn't catch his name
but he was some justice guy, and he was flabbergasted that ** would do something so over-the-top, especially with the alleged Abramoff/White House links. He said the appearance of impropriety would be hard to explain away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-28-06 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. Thanks anyway :-) I often miss names on these shows. It sounds like a...
really interesting and hopefully enlightening show though.

Hardball is one show that many seem to watch (I used to when we could get it) so hopefully Americans will hear and understand the truth and recognize the spin for what it is... lies and bullpuckey to cover BushCo's constant assault on America and her Constitution.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuffleClaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
39. "...it would not affect the investigation"
suuuuuuuuure it won't. bush has no shame. this needs to be investigated or at the very least, made an issue by the democrats and the media. the phrase 'judicial interference' comes to mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Miss Chybil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
42. I'm speechless. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
44. Unflippin' believable... and just in time for the weekend news dump too.
:grr: :puke:

Obstruction of justice is a crime.. add it to the ever growing list... THIS is why Dems NEED to take a firm stand and filibuster... THIS is why Dem Reps MUST stop playing "nice" and go after BushCo and all of his cronies. Hit them hard with FACTS and keep hitting hard... meanwhile we "grassroots" folks need to keep getting the word out to whomever will listen.

Kick the CROOKS and TRAITORS out of OUR White House!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
45. Seems like this is grounds for a special prosecutor if there weren't
enough before. It is clear that the Bush Justice Department can't be trusted to investigate this. "If it quacks like a duck......"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
46. The Abramoff investigator's nomination was done in **June 2005**
Googling brings up these articles....he was nominated back in June 2005. Given **everything** that has been exposed between then and now, the nomination doesn't seem to have influenced the team of investigators a whole lot.

http://www.indianz.com/News/2005/008751.asp

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

The Department of Justice's Public Integrity Section is leading the criminal probe into disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, The Hill newspaper reports.

The Public Integrity Section is part of the Criminal Division at DOJ. It consists of 26 attorneys at DOJ headquarters and 94 U.S. attorneys who investigate and prosecute corruption among public officials and election and conflict of interest crimes.

Heading the Abramoff probe is Mary K. Butler, a former attorney with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida who was part of the independent counsel’s office into former Interior secretary Bruce Babbitt. Babbitt was cleared of allegations that he rejected an off-reservation casino after wealthy gaming tribes contributed to Democratic interests.

The Public Integrity Section chief is Noel Hillman, a former assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey. President Bush has just nominated Hillman for federal judgeship in New Jersey.


http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/061505/abramoff.html


June 15, 2005

A little-known but well-respected Justice Department trial lawyer is leading the government’s high-profile criminal investigation into disgraced Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

She is Mary K. Butler, one of 26 attorneys in the Public Integrity section and 94 U.S. attorneys around the country who investigate and prosecute cases of extortion, bribery, election crimes and criminal conflicts of interest.

Although there has been intense scrutiny of Abramoff and his associates, little is known about the career government attorneys investigating him. A Department of Justice spokesman declined to comment, but lawyers who represent a witness in the Abramoff investigation or who have dealt with Justice helped flesh out how the section operates.


Butler reports to Noel Hillman, section chief, whom President Bush nominated to a federal judgeship last week. Hillman, an avid surfer and Bruce Springsteen fan, was an assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey before coming to Washington.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
47. This sounds a lot like Saturday Night Massacre.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. Not.
This guy was up for a judgship for a while, with the backing of Corzine and Lautenberg. He's being replaced by a career DOJ prosecutor. If you think that sounds like the Saturday Night Massacre, you need to read up on your history.

onenote
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
48. We need a special prosecutor
this is beyond ridiculous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
54. We need a special prosecutor for this and for the NSA spying
Bush is on the verge of declaring himself supreme leader, a dictator for short, and unless he is stopped now we will lose this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #54
59. The illegal torture and fake Iraq intel, too.
I fear the only way the little turd from Crawford sees getting out of it is through another terror act.

May the good people in government -- and out -- see it as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-28-06 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
61. Four things that concern me:
1. This information comes out just in time for the weekend news dump.

2. Was hill given a judgeship in exchange for information about the Abran-Off case. Can Hill now tell bush* people just where the trial was headed etc.or is that against the law?

3. This stunt was pure evil/political/unethical conniving and I can't see how it can be legal. Oh. I forgot...bush can do anything he wants.

4. All this information needs to be sent to all corp/media and discussed throughly and more people need to see what this resident-in-Chief is doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC