Why No Charges For Schlozman?

[proud2BlibKansan]

By Zachary Roth - January 13, 2009, 12:33PM

Given that the DOJ Inspector General's report found that Bradley Schlozman broke the law in making politicized hiring decisions, and lied about it to Congress, why and how did the US Attorney's office make the decision to decline to bring criminal charges?

We got a bit more information on that question from Patricia Riley, special counsel to the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, which conducted the investigation.

Riley told TPMmuckraker that her office was only asked by the Inspector General's office to look into the possible perjury charges stemming from Schlozman's congressional testimony, rather than the underlying hiring decisions. She said that six career prosecutors, with between 10 and 21 years experience, conducted the investigation, reporting to Assistant US Attorney Channing Phillips (US Attorney Jeffrey Taylor recused himself from the probe).

The investigation continued until last Friday, said Riley, and included interviews with witnesses who were not contacted by the IG's report. Based on that investigation, a decision was made not to bring criminal charges.

more . . . http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/why_no_charges_for_schlozman.php

[Tarheel_Dem]

1. Sadly, I suspect this report was timed to come out before Bush left office.

I just wonder if the Obama Justice Dept will have the authority to prosecute? It's beyond me that this cabal can commit crimes with impunity, and refuse to investigate themselves. Perhaps Leahy can call for a special prosecutor?

[lpbk2713]

2. I saw KO's article on this tonight and I was infuriated.

I hope Obama has a thorough house cleaning at the Justice Dept at the top of his agenda.

[Mz Pip]

3. that guy was an appalling piece of work

He should be in jail. He obviously didn't pay much attention in his Constitutional Law class and missed the part about having an independent judiciary. Of course he's not the only one. The Bush Administration made it a point to have a partisan judiciary.

It's going to take a while to undo that mess.

[Old and In the Way]

4. When your DOJ is guilty of perjuring testimony in front of Congress,

it's a pretty sad indictment on the impotency of Congress and the corruption of the DOJ. Obviously, this administration (Karl Rove) is deep into the politicization of DOJ. The findings are 9 months old, but they are only now releasing it (and not to Congress first)? They obviously are hoping that the Obama administration will let bygones be bygones...but what about the next time Republicans come into power? Will we ignore the crime and create the precedent to let it happen again? If they do overturn the findings...I expect a concerted effort by all of the RW choir to shriek their message of victimhood and righteously claim that Obama is a lackey of far left radicals who is carrying out a partisan agenda. This is dangerous territory for the Bush administration and they won't go down quietly on protecting Schlozman from prosecution.

[Mojorabbit]

5. I will call my

representatives tomorrow but it will probably be a waste of time.

[tom_paine]

6. Because, in the American Empire, being a Loyal Bushie Aristocrat usually means

being 100% above the law, so long as said Loyal Bushie doesn't go too far and do something that can't be fixed by application of the Toady M$M, such as murdering twenty widows and orphans in cold blood and publicly feasting on their organs.

If Scholzmann had done that, instead of merely committing multiple felonies and treason against America, he might have actually gone to trial.

Now I am not saying that Scholzmann would have been pronounced guilty after publicly eating the remains of his twenty victims, for that would be naive, but for that he might have at least gone to trial.

[Hubert Flottz]

7. Clinton gets roasted alive by the GOP for lying under oath

and the repubs that lie under oath get an atta'boy...nobody but a neocon is above the law

[newtothegame]

8. Because lying to congress and getting away with it has been natural and accepted since the late 90's

[ThomWV]

9. One begs to wonder what will happen after next week.

Oh, and a change of US Attorney in the DC district which will come after change of Attorney General.