Damn. There is just so much out there. Just limited to the fired US Attorney scandal, there is pre-hearings and post-hearings. Here is what Marshall reported about the scandal before the hearings started, boiled down; in the next post, what was reported on the hearings themselves.

Here Marshall points out that Domenici’s claim again Iglesias is based upon “public accounts” of Iglesias not moving on cases quickly enough, but Domenici says it’s immigration and drug cases. However, the only public account that spoke of unhappiness about Iglesias was a December 2006 Albuquerque Journal article which noted that Domenici was in trouble for not pushing more public corruption investigations–which were, in Iglesias’ case, exclusively against Democrats. But Iglesias could not move fast enough on those cases because his office was overwhelmed with immigration and narcotics cases.

Furthermore, DOJ statistics show that contrary to Domenici’s claims, Iglesias actually accelerated work on cases–increasing the number of cases his office handled, and shortening the time needed to process each case. When Iglesias took over in his office, cases took 4.6 months to finish; in 2005, Iglesias had cut that down to 3.7. Furthermore, when Iglesias took over, the had been handling 1,548 cases per year; by 2005, Iglesias had that up to 2,915, nearly double what his predecessor had accomplished. So how was Iglesias “not moving fast enough,” or not getting enough work done?

Meanwhile, Heather Wilson, in another in a series of “not my fault” apologies, now says that her “constituents” were complaining to her of the slow pace of corruption cases–but since the cases were only against Democrats, that means that Wilson is referring to partisan Republicans complaining that the US Attorney wasn’t hitting Democrats hard or fast enough for their liking. Not exactly solid grounds for dismissal.

But Iglesias was contacted by Wilson and then Domenici both within ten days, asking about the latest corruption case against a Democrat during an election season, and Iglesias says it will happen when process goes forward naturally, not when Republican politicians want it for campaign dirt. Then five weeks later Iglesias is told he’ll be canned.

Now, just before they have been called to testify in Congress, prosecutors are being threatened by the administration, which claims it will release “previously undisclosed details about the reasons they were fired.” A not-very-veiled threat that if you testify against us, we’ll smear your ass.

Meanwhile, Darryl Issa (of Recall Gray Davis fame) is trying to cover his own ass, trying to lay the groundwork for firing Carol Lam. The reason: she didn’t do enough work on border crime. However, readers of Marshall’s page note that Domenici seems to be claiming that Iglesias was fired for doing too much immigration work, so there’s yet another inconsistency. But what an inconsistency: in New Mexico, where Democrats were being prosecuted, there wasn’t enough corruption work; in California, where Republicans were being prosecuted, there was too much corruption work. Interesting division there.

But the scandal may be widening. A former federal prosecutor from Maryland says that he was forced out of his office in 2005 for investigating associates of the Republican governor’s in corruption cases; Thomas M. DiBiagio says that “There was direct pressure not to pursue these investigations.” He did not mention it earlier because he thought his was an isolated case, but is speaking now in light of new information about widespread abuse.

But there’s more, in the next post.