Domenici: I'm Sorry, So Sorry; CREW Files Ethics Complaint Against Pete

What a load of double talk. First Pete Domenici claims he doesn't know what Iglesias is talking about when revelations are made about Pete's pressuring calls to the U.S. Attorney. After days of stonewalling, Domenici suddenly has an epiphany and remembers the calls, but claims they were innocuous, innocent, run-of-the-mill inquiries checking on progress. Then he ends with an apology, saying he should never have made the calls (see statement). Why would he be saying he's sorry about calls that were perfectly justifiable and ethical in nature, according to his own characterization? And why would the Senator himself be making calls to Iglesias about mundane, how-are-things-going matters when he's got a bunch of staffers to handle business as usual queries like that?

It's obvious Domenici stayed quiet until he counld rendezvous with Alberto's Justice Department hacks and get his story aligned with their carefully crafted excuses. Oh, nobody, Domenici included, was pushing anything political or doing anything unusual in the unprecedented mass firings of eight U.S. Attorneys. After all, it's not like the Bush administration has any record of operating completely in the political realm on every issue or anything. It's just a coincidence that political operative supreme Karl Rove occupies a space cheek by jowl with The Decider in the White House. No, all the fuss was merely about rooting out poor performers and getting more immigration and drug prosecutions. The fact that many of the fired attorneys were involved in politically sensitive cases was just happenstance. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

As Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo has mentioned, if a federal prosecutor gets a personal call from a powerful homestate Senator about an open case that has huge political implications, it's a little more signficant than a howdy do. The Senator doesn't have to be verbally specific during such a call to make it known that pressure is being applied in no uncertain terms.

Ethics Charge Filed Today Against Domenici
Naomi Seligman Steiner of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington had said that if Iglesias named Wilson and Domenici, then CREW would "certainly" draft an ethics complaint against Domenici in the Senate and ask the House ethics committee to investigate Wilson. Today, they followed through with a complaint against Domenici, based on his own admissions of making calls to Iglesias.

In their press release, CREW notes that:

In a discussion of Senate Rule 43, the Senate Ethics Manual states that “[t]he general advice of the Ethics Committee concerning pending court actions is that Senate offices should refrain from intervening in such legal actions . . . until the matter has reached a resolution in the courts.” The manual also indicates that Senators are not to communicate with an agency regarding ongoing enforcement or investigative matters.

And as reported in an article in Sunday's Washington Post:

Stanley Brand, an ethics lawyer who served as House counsel in the 1980s, said Iglesias's allegation could result in internal congressional ethics probes. "It's going to precipitate a huge problem," Brand said, warning also of a potential review by the Justice Department.

Finally, here's what Talking Points Memo, which has become THE provider of online info on this case, has to say today about what we can expect during tomorrow's hearings in both House and the Senate committees.

On the matter of Mr. Iglesias's testimony on Tuesday, let's remember a few things. Sen. Domenici (R-NM) and the political appointees at the Justice Department have strong motivations for supporting each others claims about management shortcomings during Mr. Iglesias's tenure -- despite the fact that there appears to be little if any evidence for this prior to Iglesias's ouster. Domenici has already if not lied than intentionally misled the public about his contacts with Iglesias. Remember, when first asked about Iglesias's claims about calls to his office from members of the New Mexico, Domenici said "I have no idea what he's talking about." It's only by the most generous and clement interpretation that that statement doesn't peg Domenici as a liar. So he's already misled the public and taken an action which even by the most innocent reading appears to violate congressional ethics rules. He doesn't have much credibility. The folks at Main Justice don't have much either when you consider that they've run through several different explanations at this point for why Iglesias was fired.

So let's see what Iglesias says. He's levelled extremely serious charges. So he deserves scrutiny too. But let's not miss that we're about to witness that most familiar of Bush era storylines, the whistleblower heading into the buzzsaw, with the full panoply of DOJ, Republican senators, National Review yakkers and RNC smearlords ready to crank up the noise machine to make sure Iglesias is too bashed and bruised by the end of the week to make his charges amount to anything.