Justice Dept politicized hiring process

  • News
  • Thread starter fourier jr
  • Start date
  • #1
740
13
Of course Gonzales says he knew nothing! It was only an aide of his who cherry-picked pro-Bush Republicans:

Senior aides to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales broke the law by using politics to guide their hiring decisions for a wide range of important department positions, slowing the hiring process at critical times and damaging the department's credibility and independence, an internal report concluded Monday.

The report, prepared by the Justice Department's inspector general and its internal ethics office, singles out for particular criticism Monica Goodling, a young lawyer from the Republican National Committee who rose quickly through the ranks of the department to become a top aide to Gonzales.

Ms. Goodling, who testified before Congress in May 2007 at the height of the scandal over the firings of nine United States attorneys, introduced politics into the hiring process in a systematic way that constituted illegal misconduct, the report found.

*snip*

In one case, for instance, Goodling slowed the hiring of a prosecutor in the United States attorney's office in Washington, D.C., for a vacancy because she said she was concerned that he was a "liberal Democrat." After the United States attorney, Jeffrey Taylor, complained to her supervisors, he was allowed to hire the candidate anyway.

And in another case, colleagues said that Goodling refused to extend the appointment of a female prosecutor because she believed the lawyer was involved in a lesbian relationship with her supervisor, according to the report.

And in another case cited by the inspector general, Goodling blocked the hiring of an experienced prosecutor for a senior counter-terrorism position because his wife was active in Democratic politics. The candidate was regarded as "head and shoulders above the other candidates" in the view of officials in the executive office of United States attorneys, but they were forced to take a candidate with much less experience because he was deemed acceptable to Goodling.

In forwarding a résumé in 2006 from a lawyer who was working for the Federalist Society, Goodling sent an e-mail message to the head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Steven Bradbury, saying: "Am attaching a résumé for a young, conservative female lawyer."

Goodling interviewed the woman herself for possible positions and wrote in her notes such phrases as "pro-God in public life," and "pro-marriage, anti-civil union." She was eventually hired as a career prosecutor.

Goodling also conducted extensive searches on the Internet to glean the political or ideological leanings of candidates for career positions, the report found. She and other Justice Department supervisors would look for key phrases like "abortion," "homosexual," "guns," or "Florida re-count" to get information on a candidate's political leanings.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/29/america/29justice.php
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
13
I'm not sure this is news.
I'm pretty sure it's being going on since the senate really was the senate and the guy in charge was called caeser.
 
  • #3
67
166
It looks like Bush will be handing out executive privilege to a few more people.
 
  • #4
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616
I'm not sure this is news.
I'm pretty sure it's being going on since the senate really was the senate and the guy in charge was called caeser.
No, you're being cynical. The Justice Department is *supposed to be* non-political - we are a nation of laws, for crying out loud!!!

You can probably find instances that look like the department was working under partisan influence, but nothing like what the incompetent boobs Bush put in there have been up to.
 
  • #5
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
I'm not sure this is news.
If this (meaning the whole disaster in "Justice", spanning the last few years) isn't, then the word 'news' becomes somewhat meaningless.
 
  • #6
67
166
I think it would be difficult to find a federal department or agency in the Bush administration that has not been corrupted.

This now includes the EPA.

The June 16 e-mail from Robbi Farrell, who heads the agency's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, instructs managers to remind employees "at your next staff meeting" that if they "are contacted directly by the IG's office or GAO requesting information of any kind . . . Please do not respond to questions or make any statements."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/28/AR2008072801198.html
 
  • #7
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
13
I think it would be difficult to find a federal department or agency in the Bush administration that has not been corrupted.
I thought that was the American system, the whole administration changes with a new goverment - isn't it supposed to be more democratic than the British system of having the same civil service run the country irrespective of who happens to have been elected.

When you have local fire chiefs or police elected - is it along party lines? Do you have a democrat/republican candidate?

ps. Of course no goverment interference doesn't mean it's free and representative. In the UK the judges are appointed by other judges without any goverment interference, but somehow they all seem to be similairly polically conservative - there aren't many radical feminist or marxist-leninist judges.
 
  • #8
740
13
I thought that was the American system, the whole administration changes with a new goverment - isn't it supposed to be more democratic than the British system of having the same civil service run the country irrespective of who happens to have been elected.
No, the public service is supposed to be nonpartisan.
 
  • #9
67
166
I thought that was the American system, the whole administration changes with a new goverment - isn't it supposed to be more democratic than the British system of having the same civil service run the country irrespective of who happens to have been elected.
There is much more to it than that. each agencey has an Inspector General who's oversight is supposed to be politically neutral.

All Departments and Agencies are held accountable by the GAO (Government Accounting Office) also neutral.

Employees of the Environmental Protection Agency and others have been instructed not to speak with either the IG or the GAO.

Our system of checks and balances has been run through Bush's paper shredder.
 
  • #10
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
13
All Departments and Agencies are held accountable by the GAO (Government Accounting Office) also neutral.
We have the NAO National Audit Office - extremely fair and independant but totally useless. They famously publish a report years later suggesting that some obvious pork barrel project "might not have delivered the best value to the tax payer"!

Our system of checks and balances has been run through Bush's paper shredder.
You could have another revolution, it's been ages since the last one.
Dump the starbucks in Boston Harbour - I'm sure the French will, once again, be willing to help you overthrow the oppressive goverment.
We would appreciate it though, if this time you didn't send the loalyists to Canada.
 

Related Threads on Justice Dept politicized hiring process

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
865
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
11K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
915
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
1K
Top