Inspecter General investigation into the DOJ

evince

evince

Truthmatters
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../06/23/AR2008062301796.html?wpisrc=newsletter


It seems they took over the hiring practices from the panel who did the hiring in the past and hired only partisan law graduates. They stocked the DOJ with right wing people adn disregaurded the quality of the graduates.


The honors program, which each year places about 150 law school graduates with top credentials in a rotation of Justice jobs, historically had operated under the control of senior career officials. Shifting control of the program to Ashcroft's advisers prompted charges of partisanship from law professors and former government lawyers who had worked under Democratic administrations.
 
Last edited:
Desh said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../06/23/AR2008062301796.html?wpisrc=newsletter


It seems they took over the hiring practices from the panel who did the hiring in the past and hired only partisan law graduates. They stocked the DOJ with right wing people adn disregaurded the quality of the graduates.


The honors program, which each year places about 150 law school graduates with top credentials in a rotation of Justice jobs, historically had operated under the control of senior career officials. Shifting control of the program to Ashcroft's advisers prompted charges of partisanship from law professors and former government lawyers who had worked under Democratic administrations.
Click to expand...

enough said
 
"Mark Corallo, a Justice spokesman during Ashcroft's tenure, has said that the overhaul was intended to broaden candidate pools and include students from a range of law schools, not only Ivy League institutions."

So instead of just taking Ivy League elitists, they opened it up to others... for SHAME.
 
Superfreak said:
"Mark Corallo, a Justice spokesman during Ashcroft's tenure, has said that the overhaul was intended to broaden candidate pools and include students from a range of law schools, not only Ivy League institutions."

So instead of just taking Ivy League elitists, they opened it up to others... for SHAME.
Click to expand...
Not taking JUST Ivy Leaguers was probably a good thing but hiring only political shills to do justice is bullshit as well. You want the best people from broadrange of backgrounds and a desire to do justice. Not a desire to carry out political policy.
 
Last edited:
They used political reasons to refuse qualified people.

Yeah that is really great.

have you no shame
 
Superfreak said:
enough said
Click to expand...


You're a jackass and have no clue how the government works, let alone how the Department of Justice has operated for the past god-knows-how-long.

In short, there are career non-partisan attorneys and officials that work in the department (and other departments) for their entire careers regardless of who is the President. Then there are political appointees that each president gets to make. This president changed all that and made general hiring practices for career non-appointee positions subject to political litmus tests and more like the hiring practices for the appointee positions, thus polticizing the DoJ unliek any president before him

This is going to be the biggest problem for a Obama administration if he wins. There are political hacks in career positions in probably every department of the government that won't just go away with a new administration. And the elves will be busy for sure.
 
Socrtease said:
Not taking JUST Ivy Leaguers was probably a good thing but hiring only political shills to do justice is bullshit as well. You want the best people from broadrange of backgrounds and a desire to do justice. Not a desire to carry out political policy.
Click to expand...

I agree with that portion that it is bullshit. I just find it funny when those that have maintained an elitist control over something start bitching when that control has been removed. Because if it has indeed been limited to the Ivy schools in the past then that indicates a decidedly leftist bias towards appointments in the past.
 
Elitists?

Hiring from our best schools the BEST candidates is now eletism?

How many non elite balck schools did they hire from?
 
Desh said:
Elitists?

Hiring from our best schools the BEST candidates is now eletism?

How many non elite balck schools did they hire from?
Click to expand...
Desh they were hiring prosecutors. SOme people to investigate and prosecute civil rights claims etc. They teach from the exact same books at Harvard and Yale that they teach from at University of New Mexico Law school and the law school at UNLV. They don't know any secret prosecutorial tricks at harvard that they don't know anywhere else. When you hire from Harvard or Yale solely because that person came from Harvard or Yale it is elitist.
 
Who said that is what they were doing?

They were hiring the best ...well until Ashcroft came along.
 
Socrtease said:
Desh they were hiring prosecutors. SOme people to investigate and prosecute civil rights claims etc. They teach from the exact same books at Harvard and Yale that they teach from at University of New Mexico Law school and the law school at UNLV. They don't know any secret prosecutorial tricks at harvard that they don't know anywhere else. When you hire from Harvard or Yale solely because that person came from Harvard or Yale it is elitist.
Click to expand...


Wow. You ate up the DoJ line pretty quickly on this one.
 
For those that have an actual interest in what was going on here, you can read the report at the link below. Keep in mind that this report was prepared by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice, not Congress. It is a rather large pdf:

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/e0806/final.pdf

In short, it is illegal to use political affiliation or political positions in hiring decisions for career positions at the Department of Justice:

Positions for DOJ attorneys fall into two broad categories: political and career. It is not improper to consider political or ideological affiliations when hiring for DOJ political positions. However, as discussed below, both DOJ policy and civil service law prohibit discrimination in hiring for DOJ career positions on the basis of political affiliations. This prohibition applies to attorneys hired for permanent positions through the Honors Program as well as summer interns hired through the SLIP, because these are considered career
positions.

The Department’s policy on nondiscrimination is contained in the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 42.1(a) of 28 C.F.R. Part 42, Subpart A, which states:
It is the policy of the Department of Justice to seek to eliminate discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital
status, political affiliation, age, or physical or mental handicap in employment within the Department and to assure equal employment opportunity for all employees and applicants for employment (emphasis added).
Click to expand...

While the regulation does not define “political affiliation,” courts have considered political affiliation to include “commonality of political purpose, partisan activity, and political support.” See, e.g., Curinga v. City of Clairton, 357 F.3d 305, 311 (3d Cir. 2004).
Click to expand...


The DoJ violated the regulations and the law by using political affiliation in its hiring practices for new attorneys.

It's fairly straight-forward and has nothing to do with elitism.
 
Mark Corallo, a Justice spokesman during Ashcroft's tenure, has said that the overhaul was intended to broaden candidate pools and include students from a range of law schools, not only Ivy League institutions. The strategy persisted until tension among political appointees and career staff members came to a head in mid-2007.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top