US Attorney Pressured to Indict Before Elections

apotropoxy · #1 (**permalink**) 03-01-2007, 06:39 AM

Quote:

In an interview Tuesday, Iglesias said the two lawmakers called him about a well-known criminal investigation involving a Democratic legislator. He declined to provide their party affiliation, but his comments indicated the callers were Republicans.
[...]
Iglesias said He said the calls made him feel "pressured to hurry the subsequent cases and prosecutions" the lawmakers who called him seemed focused on whether charges would be filed before the November elections.[...]
In addition to Iglesias's probe of Democrats, fired prosecutors in Arizona, Nevada and California were conducting corruption probes involving Republicans at the time of their dismissals.[...]
Iglesias produced statistics showing that his office's immigration prosecutions had risen more than 78 percent during his tenure and said the office prosecuted record numbers of narcotics and firearms cases as well.Iglesias cited a January 2006 letter from Michael A. Battle -- the Justice official who fired him -- commending him for "exemplary leadership in the department's priority programs." A November 2005 evaluation obtained by The Washington Post also said Iglesias was "experienced in legal, management and community relations work and was respected by the judiciary, agencies and staff."http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801502_2.html?referrer=email

Bush the Lame out Nixons Nixon.

SenaxFlatulus · #2 (**permalink**) 03-01-2007, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apotropoxy";p=&quot

Bush the Lame out Nixons Nixon.

Don't you mean "out Hillarys Hillary?"

Quote:

Iglesias's allegations were met with strong denials from the Justice Department yesterday but prompted the Democratic-controlled House and Senate judiciary committees to announce that they would issue subpoenas for testimony from Iglesias and other fired prosecutors if necessary. Iglesias said he would not testify unless subpoenaed.

Nothing like a willing witness for the Democrats to exploit eh?

Quote:

Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse called Iglesias's allegations "flatly false." Roehrkasse said that Iglesias should have reported any calls from lawmakers, as required under department guidelines.

Any idea as to the reason Iglesias neglected established procedures?

Quote:

In briefings about the firings on Capitol Hill, Justice Department officials had said that Iglesias was the target of complaints from members of Congress, according to several sources familiar with the meetings, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss personnel issues. The Justice briefers did not specify the nature of those complaints, the sources said.

Ah yes, the hallmark of the liberal media... the anonymous source. How convenient. Y'know, I'd almost be disappointed if there wasn't at least one "source, on the condiditon of anonymity."

liberalman · #3 (**permalink**) 03-01-2007, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by apotropoxy";p=&quot

Bush the Lame out Nixons Nixon.

Don't you mean "out Hillarys Hillary?"

Quote:

Iglesias's allegations were met with strong denials from the Justice Department yesterday but prompted the Democratic-controlled House and Senate judiciary committees to announce that they would issue subpoenas for testimony from Iglesias and other fired prosecutors if necessary. Iglesias said he would not testify unless subpoenaed.

Nothing like a willing witness for the Democrats to exploit eh?

Quote:

Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse called Iglesias's allegations "flatly false." Roehrkasse said that Iglesias should have reported any calls from lawmakers, as required under department guidelines.

Any idea as to the reason Iglesias neglected established procedures?

Quote:

In briefings about the firings on Capitol Hill, Justice Department officials had said that Iglesias was the target of complaints from members of Congress, according to several sources familiar with the meetings, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss personnel issues. The Justice briefers did not specify the nature of those complaints, the sources said.

Ah yes, the hallmark of the liberal media... the anonymous source. How convenient. Y'know, I'd almost be disappointed if there wasn't at least one "source, on the condiditon of anonymity."

Perusual your full of it myu freind....

Hmm a willing witness?
"Iglesias said he would not testify unless subpoenaed"

Nope

Hmm mthe liberal media is the only ones who use "anonymous" sources? Hmmm do you really want to be this flat out wrong or do you want to retract before I hit the freeper news?

Oh and once again enough with the whiny crybaby "liberal" media BS. I have yet to see anyone prove this liberal slant. Mayhap you have something to share....or is this another WAAAAAAAH! moment from the right?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode