Tuesday, February 13, 2007

5 ousted U.S. attorneys received positive job evaluations

Uh, ya don't think someone's lying about all this do ya? Just asking
Although the Bush administration has said that six U.S. attorneys were fired recently in part because of "performance related" issues, at least five of them received positive job evaluations before they were ordered to step down.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, using authority he gained in March from a little-noticed provision of the Patriot Act, has appointed interim U.S. attorneys from the Bush administration's inner circle. The firings and appointments have raised concerns that Gonzales is politicizing the process.

Supporters of the U.S. attorneys and Justice Department officials familiar with the job evaluations suggested in interviews that top Justice Department officials may have exaggerated the role job performance played in the firings.

A Justice Department official who spoke on behalf of the administration said the dispute might simply be a matter of "semantics."

"Performance-related can mean many things," said the official, who asked to remain anonymous because the Privacy Act bars officials from discussing personnel decisions. "Policy is set at a national level. Individual U.S. attorneys around the country can't just make up their policy agenda."

Performance reviews of U.S. attorneys are conducted every three to four years by a team of experienced Justice Department officials, who interview judges, staff members, community leaders and federal agents. In some of the five cases, the reviewers made recommendations for improvements, but overall their assessments were positive, Justice Department officials said.

For instance, Daniel Bogden, the U.S. attorney in Nevada, was described in his last job performance evaluation in 2003 as being a "capable" leader who was highly regarded by the federal judiciary and investigators.

"He didn't get any dings," said a Justice Department official with knowledge of the review. "The overall evaluation was very positive."

Of course Bush is packing the courts. He doesn't even bother with "subtle" anymore.

(read more)

Labels: , ,

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I shudder at the long-term implications of W's court appointments.

2/13/2007 08:55:00 PM  
Blogger SPIIDERWEB™ said...

I read somewhere, don't remember where, a new president can replace any judges s/he wants to. So maybe it won't be long-term. If there are some real hacks among the appointments, they can be replaced.

Of course that completely ignores the people involved. Several have been fired now and new ones appointed just to have all that reversed possibly in two years? That's no way to treat people.

2/13/2007 09:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, depending on how you think about it, it's not at all implausible that the Bush administration was displeased with their performance.

As for the law, one of Specter's staffers (supposedly without his knowledge, but he's too much of a Bush-sucking weasel for me to give him the benefit of the doubt) inserted a sneaky last-minute provision in the Patriot Act that gave the president the authority to appoint replacement US Attorneys without any congressional approval.

Do I have any sympathy for Bush's appointees getting summarily replaced in two years by President Gore? FUCK NO.

2/14/2007 12:43:00 AM  
Blogger SPIIDERWEB™ said...

Have to agree with you, Eli.

2/14/2007 07:13:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home