Notes on Marshall, Part II
Ye Gods. So much, so much. And I’m not even touching on Walter Reed or Scooter Libby. If Bush’s ratings don’t fall in the next week, then it can only mean he’s reached rock bottom. Here’s the rundown of Josh Marshall’s reporting:
David Iglesias testified that Pete Domenici called him at home, and specifically asked if the investigation on corruption of a Democratic candidate in an election would be made public before November, when elections would be held; when Iglesias said “no,” Domenici said that was “disappointing” and hung up. Domenici is now claiming that Iglesias “confirmed” that “my words did not threaten him,” when Iglesias’ testimony in fact said the exact opposite. When your state’s senator (who can get you fired) calls you up at home, asks if damning indictments against a political opponent will be made public before an election, says it is “disappointing” when the answer is negative, and hangs up, you’re damned right it’s threatening. Iglesias himself said that after the call, he felt “sick,” “pressured,” and “leaned on.” I suppose Domenici figures it wasn’t “threatening” because Iglesias did not use that exact word.
Pretty much all of the fired attorneys reported never hearing any criticism of their work involving supporting administration policies, but instead received praise from the Department of Justice on their work. A DoJ official testified that they informed none of the fired attorneys of their displeasure before the firings. Senator Feinstein reported that when she inquired to the DoJ about Carol Lam’s performance on immigration cases, they replied that they were “satisfied” with her performance.
Three of the fired attorneys (Cummins, McKay, and Iglesias) say they would have opened an obstruction investigation against Michael Elston on the Deputy Attorney General’s staff, for calling Bud Cummings and threatening him about testifying. Supposedly, this is what Elston was talking about–the DoJ’s trumped-up list of reasons why the attorneys were fired. One in particular was interesting–the DoJ claimed that Cummins was let go because he said he’d be quitting soon; Cummins denies he ever said such a thing.
Another big bombshell was a report by another fired US Attorney (John McKay of Washington State) of another pressuring phone call. Ed Cassidy, Chief of Staff to Republican Rep. Doc Hastings, called McKay in the weeks following the razor-close 2004 Governor’s election in which the Democrat was certified after a third recount. Cassidy asked questions about investigations into voter fraud in the election, and McKay felt that he was getting into dangerous territory–so, “I stopped him, and I told him that I was sure that he wasn’t asking me on behalf of his boss to reveal information about an ongoing investigation, or to lobby me on one because we both knew that would be improper.” Cassidy then quickly agreed that it would have been improper, and hung up on McKay.
Hastings’ office first denied that the telephone call was ever made, then admitted it was made (darn telephone records again) but said it was not improper.
Meanwhile, fired Arizona US Attorney Paul K. Charlton was supposedly fired for disagreeing with FBI policy of not taping confessions. Charlton had complained that taping confessions was “essential” in child molestation cases. The DoJ agreed to a pilot program to measure whether taped confessions could help get more convictions, but Charlton never heard from them on it again–until he was fired for it.
Daniel Bogden of Utah and Paul Charlton of Arizona also testified that they had been told in one form or another by acting Associate Attorney General William Mercer that the firings were being carried out so that individuals favored by the administration could get choice employment that would look great on their resumes.
Looking at the list of “reasons” why the attorneys were fired, I am reminded of a personal experience. When working for a language school in my first stint as a manager, I did an excellent job, if I do say so myself. My biggest achievement was a new system of scheduling that allowed three people to manage four schools by working less than twenty hours a week, when the previous system required four managers working more than thirty hours a week. I had received nothing but glowing praise for the entire year of my “probation” as a manager–no negative comments, no suggestions that I was doing anything wrong at all. Just effusive praise. But then, when it came time to review my probation, I was suddenly deemed unfit because the Japanese administrative manager had pointed out a “mistake” that was more likely than not a simple communications error both of us were responsible for. But it was reason enough to deny me a full management position, meaning that the school could keep me at a pay level $15,000 a year lower than the previous managers had been paid.
I outlined the fiasco here, but it is a perfect example of an administration creating completely fake reasons for taking negative action against an employee for reasons other than what were stated–because the real reasons are dishonest and unethical. And the DoJ’s list reeks of that kind of thing.
I have been knifed in the back after exceptional performance four, five, probably six times in my career, at great personal loss to my self.
Indeed, I got nominated for the President’s award at McDonnell Douglas after bringing in a project in half the time, with good moral, to boot, and a few months later I was laid off. This was in 1991, and cost me my entire savings, which I was about to lay down on Chrysler stock then trading at $11 a share, and subsequently went to $60 a share. But my savings was “grocery” money so I couldn’t bring myself to lay the money down. It took me over a year to find a job and I lost my savings in the process.
In the corporate business world, you don’t own your achievements. People will try to steal your just deserts, like jackels trying to chase off a cheetah from its dinner after it brought down an antelope. High performance is a threat to everyone else, especially if its in management areas, so if you don’t have a mentor, sponsor or high placed patron looking out for you, then high performance is nothing other than painting a target on you back.
This is why I prefered consulting over at will employment whenever I had the chance. You are outside the politics. Because you are not an employee, you can’t get promoted, but you get paid more than if you were an employee. Because you can’t get promoted, people don’t go after you with a knife.
Like I said, I have been knifed in the back five or six times, it was always bloody and brutal, and mind numbing how terrible people can be in the work place.
As for myself, if I had avoided getting laid off, I figured I would be a millionaire by now. Instead I am deaply in debt and working just to service my debt until my luck changes, hopefully, some time in the next few years. That requires and economic turnaround, that won’t happen until the Dems are in control and they implement demand side policies that will explode economic growth in the U.S., and subsequently spread world wide.