Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Info regarding Minnesota US Attorney that stepped down prior to mass firing

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 02:48 PM
Original message
Info regarding Minnesota US Attorney that stepped down prior to mass firing
Edited on Sat Apr-07-07 02:50 PM by Horse with no Name
http://mncampaignreport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=326
>>>snip
*Thomas Heffelfinger of Minnesota resigned February 28, 2006 to return to the private sector. At the time, he cited "personal" and "financial" reasons for his resignation. (sources: Pioneer Press, 2/15/06; Star Tribune, 2/15/06)

>>>snip
Possible motives for why the Justice Department would want to get rid of Heffelfinger are hard to come by, too. Of course, the ongoing attorney purge story has shown that Sampson et. al. did not feel the need to justify their actions at all, dismissing well-respected, effective attorneys who had been given positive performance reviews and then claiming that they were dismissed for "performance-related" reasons.

One possible motive I came up with is Heffelfinger's refusal to pursue Mary Kiffmeyer's crusade against Hennepin and Ramsey counties in what seemed like a clear attempt to depress voter turnout in those two overwhelmingly Democratic counties by invalidating voter registration forms. The City Pages has a detailed explanation of the situation, which a Macalester newspaper editorial described succinctly:

Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, a Republican up for reelection this year, wants to make it harder to vote. By saying that, I'm oversimplifying reality in order to grab your attention. The reality is that she really doesn't want anyone who is not of her party to vote.

That's why the Secretary of State's office produced a new, more complicated and confusing voter registration card before the 2004 elections. Hennepin County (Minneapolis) and Ramsey County (St. Paul) wouldn't bite though, and kept using the simpler federal election form. Kiffmeyer tried to get the US Attorney to take them to court, saying the counties were in violation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The US Attorney investigated, and discovered that not only were the counties safe within federal laws-they were doing exactly what HAVA prescribed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. k&r
Guess he wasn't a "Loyal Bushie"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. What I find "odd"
Is that he was one of Bush 41's men. I wonder if there lies part of the reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. The position of SOS is perhaps one of the most powerful positions in the country
since they control the voting. If you are looking for Republican corruption, it always a wise focus. kick and rec'd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
5. K & R for the people of Hennepin and Ramsey counties
Kiffmeyer needs to be investigated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
6. Editorial: Answers needed to Paulose questions (Star Tribune)
Just why was this young person appointed, and can she cut it?

Published: April 07, 2007

~snip~ It needs to be understood that all U.S. attorneys are political appointees. They get their jobs because they are politically connected. But there are two requirements: that they leave their politics at the door, and that they be competent. Paulose seems to have failed the second test, at least in the eyes of her senior managers.

It's the first requirement, however, that is at issue in the evolving Washington scandal; those fired did leave their politics at the door and thus displeased the White House, particularly because some refused to push bogus accusations of "voter fraud" as part of a Republican effort to depress voter turnout.

Here's the question that many in Minnesota want answered: Former Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer famously cried "wolf" over voter fraud that did not exist. Did Heffelfinger's low ranking in Washington, his decision to resign and Paulose's appointment flow from Kiffmeyer's inability to get her claims of fraud taken seriously by the Minnesota U.S. attorney's office?

http://www.startribune.com/561/story/1105535.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. It's hard for me to point to anywhere that officially reads, prosecutors must be apolitical
I mean, while on the job.

...I know it must be written somewhere but, the whole system's been so corrupted, I literally can't recall who or what says that they ought to leave their politics at the door. It sounds like some quaint tradition that the executive branch has never been required to follow, but largely has because wimps were in office before Bush. That can't be true, can it? But I can't remember why it wouldn't be true, so muddled is the state of the majesty (?) of the law...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Consider, for example, the following restriction:
Title 5--Administrative Personnel
CHAPTER XVI--OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS
PART 2635--STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Subpart A General Provisions
Sec. 2635.101 Basic obligation of public service.
~snip~ (b) ~snip~ (8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual. ~snip~
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14feb20071500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/janqtr/5cfr2635.101.htm


With regard to DOJ, here are some excerpts from the Attorneys Manual:

For example, an employee should contact his/her Ethics Advisor when he/she: ~snip~ (3) is asked to participate in a matter that might cause a reasonable person to question his/her impartiality ~snip~

1-4.410 Restrictions on all Employees
Employees in the Department of Justice may not:

1. Use their official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the result of an election (5 U.S.C. § 7323(a)(1). ~snip~

1-4.440 Political Referrals

In addition to restricting or limiting certain political activity, the Hatch Act also prohibits selecting officials or others involved in the examining or appointing process for competitive service positions from receiving or considering a recommendation of an applicant from a Senator or Representative, except as to the character or residence of the applicant, unless the recommendation is based on personal knowledge or records of the sender ~snip~

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title1/4mdoj.htm#1-4.440
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Does it really need to be written?
The separation of judicial and political matters must be marked with as clear a line as possible.

Ok, ok, that's unrealistic.

Put it this way. USAs should be treated almost like college professors with tenure. If they've served in their careers honorably and with proper impartial behaviour, then, by all means appoint them.

But make it hard, DAMNED hard to fire them without CLEAR, JUST CAUSE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PSPS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. It's the same as with Seattle's Kay being dismissed
Kay refused to pursue republicans' made-up charges of "voter fraud" because, in fact, his investigation showed that there was none.

This is all about bush/rove institutionalizing jim crowe-type setups where it becomes increasingly difficult to vote if you oppose the junta. Since democrats don't (yet) have to wear a cloth patch on their clothing, this is the next best thing -- disenfranchising entire classes of people based on their propensity for voting democratic.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. I am so glad Kiffmeyer is gone...
Our new Democratic Secretary of State beat her by a landslide, it was a much bigger victory than I think anyone expected. Most people don't pay much attention to the Secretary of State race, so I was worried she would win just because she was the incumbent. It seems that more people knew her partisan ways than I thought though, so now our state actually has an honest person running our elections for a change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grannylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
10. The rePiglicans NEED to push phony reports of voter fraud in order to
deflect attention away from THEIR OWN ELECTION FRAUD.
That's how they planned to build a 'permanent rePiglican majority' - through fraud and theft, since they've GOT NOTHING ELSE.
God knows they can't do it on stellar leadership, or solid policies, or better government, or anything truly worthy...they have NOTHING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. kickie poo.
This is a great discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pscot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
14. The irony in all this
is that this is absolutely the last rock that Karl Rove wanted to see turned over. Voter disenfranchisement and harrassment of minority voters has been a staple of Republicon campaigns for as long as anyone can remember. The late, unlamented Chief Justice Rehnquist made his bones by harrassing latino voters in Phoenix 50 years ago. The tactic is two pronged. Suppress the minority vote while accusing the Democrats of fraudelent registrations. Everyone, including the mainstream media, is talking about it now, because Rove got too greedy. Firing the Gonzalez Eight attracted attention to the whole corrupt machinery of electoral fraud that props up the modern GOP. Full props to Josh Marshall over at Talking Points Memo. If it weren't for his persistence, the MSM would have let this one slide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Nice synopsis. Cuts it right to the quick.
GOP is nothing but smoke and mirrors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pscot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Smoke, mirrors
and a criminal conspiracy. RICO endightments all around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Another irony is the Attorney General is a minority himself.
Gonzales used by the Bush administration. Used by Karl Rove. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-07-07 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
17. Thomas Heffelfinger was NOT a member of the Federalist Society. Palouse was.
Make no mistake = the Federalist Society might as well be called the National Socialists.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC