Democracy for New Mexico

Video: Iglesias Testifies in Senate on Wilson, Domenici Calls

Former U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, David Iglesias, testifies at this morning's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in response to questions by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). He contradicts the statements made by both Rep. Heather Wilson and Sen. Pete Domenici about the calls.

KUNM Audio: Albuquerque's public radio station, KUNM, has audio of Iglesias' 11+ minute exchange with Sen. Arlen Specter at the hearing, as well as audio of a news story on the matter that includes comments made by Iglesias at a news conference last week.

Meanwhile, Sen. Domenici released a statement after Iglesias' testimony saying he still doesn't know what Iglesias is talking about. I wonder if he issued it in his pajamas, er, hunting trousers....

Democratic Party of New Mexico Weighs In
John Wertheim, Chair of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, had this to say today about the conduct of Rep. Wilson and Sen. Domenici:

“It’s a real shame when people who present themselves as honest disgrace their political careers and their constituents by placing partisan gain above ethical governance,” said John V. Wertheim, Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico.  “Wilson and Domenici brought pressure to bear on the U.S. Attorney and then sought political retribution when Iglesias would not co-operate.  This politically-motivated intervention into the judicial process is a very grave matter.  I hope Wilson and Domenici will start confronting their misconduct responsibly, stop denying its impact and stop blaming constituents for their behavior.”

Here's the entire statement released today by the Democratic Party of New Mexico:

IGLESIAS CONTRADICTS WILSON, DOMENICI

The depths of vulnerable Republican Congresswoman Heather Wilson’s hypocrisy was exposed today.  In front of House and Senate Committees, recently ousted U.S. Attorney David Iglesias testified that Wilson and U.S. Senator Pete Domenici pressured him to speed up ongoing investigations.  If handed down prior to the election, the alleged indictments would have provided partisan benefit to the embattled Wilson.

Iglesias’ testimony and news reports show that both Wilson and Domenici intervened in an ongoing investigation by contacting the U.S. Attorney’s office in October of 2006.  Wilson, whose knowledge of sealed indictments is itself suspicious, was lagging in public opinion polls at the time of the inappropriate calls.  Despite her cozy relationship with scandal-plagued congressional Republicans, Wilson made ethics and public corruption a central campaign issue.

“It’s a real shame when people who present themselves as honest disgrace their political careers and their constituents by placing partisan gain above ethical governance,” said John V. Wertheim, Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico.  “Wilson and Domenici brought pressure to bear on the U.S. Attorney and then sought political retribution when Iglesias would not co-operate.  This politically-motivated intervention into the judicial process is a very grave matter.  I hope Wilson and Domenici will start confronting their misconduct responsibly, stop denying its impact and stop blaming constituents for their behavior.”

Wilson’s and Domenici’s initial attempts to stonewall the media only highlighted their guilty conduct.  Domenici and Wilson finally admitted in written statements that they phoned Iglesias.  Although their statements seem waffling and inconsistent, both Wilson and Domenici disingenuously blame anonymousconstituents for prompting them to violate congressional ethics rules.

An independent watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has filed a complaint against Domenici with the Senate Ethics Committee.  Communication by members of congress to U.S. Attorneys is inherently suspect because of congressional members role in the selection, approval and funding of U.S. Attorneys.  As the Washington Post editorialized today the calls were, "ethically dicey in any circumstance." [www.citizensforethics.org/]

Iglesias’ testimony today illustrates how Senator Domenici expressed his displeasure with the pace of the investigation by abruptly hanging up the phone when he became unhappy with Iglesias' response to his inquiry.  Meanwhile, Wilson has many questions to answer about, among other things, how and why she became involved in researching sealed indictments

The Democratic Party of New Mexico

Rapidly Emerging Stories on Iglesias Matter

Talking Points Memo reports "the White House 'was aware of [Domenici's] concerns' and as we showed last night, Domenici's concerns were Iglesias' too slow pace of indicting Democrats."

TPMmuckraker has video of the key portion of Iglesias' testimony this morning before the Senate Judiciary Committee. So does Think Progress.

Here's a live stream of this afternoon's House Judiciary Committee hearing on the attorney firings, and a Daily Kos thread is dedicated to live blogging. Health Haussamen has a local version on the House hearing.

After filing a complaint about Sen. Pete Domenici yesterday with the Senate ethics committee, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) today requested an investigation into Rep. Heather Wilson (R, NM-01) by the House ethics committee. Click for their complete letter. In their press release regarding Wilson, CREW said:

Rep. Wilson’s call to Mr. Iglesias violates chapter 7 of the House ethics manual, which prohibits members from contacting executive or agency officials regarding the merits of matters under their formal consideration. House rules also state that if a member wants to affect the outcome of a matter in litigation, the member can file a brief with the court, make a floor statement, or insert a statement into the Congressional Record. Directly calling officials to influence an ongoing enforcement matter is not an option.

House rules also state that a member may not claim he or she was merely requesting “background information” or a “status report” because the House has recognized that such requests “may in effect be an indirect or subtle effort to influence the substantive outcome of the proceedings.”

Rep. Wilson’s conduct may also violate the requirement that members conduct themselves in a manner that “reflects creditably on the House.” In a precedent cited by the House ethics committee when it admonished former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), the House has held that members are prohibited from asking an executive branch employee to engage in an activity having an impermissible political purpose.

CREW’s complaint alleges Rep. Wilson contacted Mr. Iglesias to discuss an ongoing investigative matter for the impermissible political purpose of harming Democrats in the November elections.

In Bloomberg's Fired Prosecutor Says He Was Warned to Keep Quiet, "H.E. "Bud'' Cummins told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Mike Elston, the deputy attorney general's top aide, threatened him with retaliation in a phone call last month if he went public [about his negative views of the firings]. Cummins said he passed the warning on to five U.S. attorneys who were ousted last December, believing that was what Elston wanted.

And don't forget my earlier post on this morning's testimony.

Subpoena Day for Fired U.S. Attorneys

UPDATE: All this, plus we learn that Scooter "Liar" Libby has been found guilty of 4 out of 5 counts in the Plame leak case, including perjury and obstruction of justice. The chickens are definitely coming home to roost, aren't they? Think Progress has video clips.
*************

Today hearings are taking place in committees in both the U.S. House (this afternoon) and Senate (this morning) featuring the testimony of many of the fired U.S. Attorneys. Las Cruces blogger Heath Haussamen is live blogging them them with frequent updates. The Senate Judiciary Committee is first up. You can also watch on C-SPAN 3 TV or online. The four former U.S. attorneys who will testify today before Senate Judiciary are David Iglesias of New Mexico; Carol Lam, former U.S. attorney for Southern California; John McKay, former U.S. attorney for Western Washington; and H.E. “Bud” Cummins II, former U.S. attorney for Eastern Arkansas.

As reported by Haussamen, here's testimony from Iglesias prompted by Sen. Chuck Schumer at this morning's Senate Judiciary hearing:

Iglesias told the committee that Domenici and Wilson were the two who called him in October, the first time he has said so publicly.

The first call was made “on or about Oct. 16,” he said, by Wilson. He said the call was “quite brief.” He then said that the second call, “approximately two weeks later,” on Oct. 26 or Oct. 27, came from Domenici. He said Domenici Chief of Staff Steve Bell called him at home to tell him Domenici wanted to speak with him.

Bell indicated “there were some complaints by citizens,” then handed the phone to Domenici. Domenici, he said, asked about pending public corruption cases.

“He said, ‘Are these going to be filed before November?’”

Iglesias told Domenici they would not, he said. Domenici, he testified, said, “I’m very sorry to hear that,” and hung up the phone.

“I felt sick after that,” Iglesias said. “… I felt leaned on. I felt pressured to get these matters moving.”

He said it was “unprecedented” for a senator to call him at home.

As for the initial call from Wilson, Iglesias said Wilson said she had “been hearing about sealed indictments, and asked, ‘What can you tell me about sealed indictments?’”

“You cannot talk about indictments,” Iglesias testified. “… I was evasive and unresponsive.”

He said he tried to explain to her why he could not talk about the indictments.

“She was not happy… and she said, ‘Well, I guess I’ll have to take your word for it,’” and ended the call, Iglesias testified.

And in response to questions from Sen. Arlen Specter:

Specter asked Iglesias about Domenici’s and Wilson’s statements, in which they have admitted to calling but denied pressuring Iglesias.

“Is Sen. Domenici wrong?” Specter asked.

Iglesias said Domenici didn’t directly threaten him, but “the fact that he would call and ask about any specific investigation was a threatening call.”

The timing of the call was a factor in making him feel threatened, Iglesias said. Iglesias said his prosecution of the treasurer scandal had become the focus of the First Congressional District campaign.

“Public corruption was a huge battle being waged by Patricia Madrid and Heather Wilson, and I assiduously tried to stay out of that,” Iglesias said, adding that Domenici’s inquiry, because of that, was inappropriate and threatening.

Iglesias admitted that Domenici said no more than Domenici asserts – that he called to ask about the case – but “the fact that the line went dead” after that led to him feeling pressured.

In a statement released Monday night, Wilson asserted that she called Iglesias to inquire about an allegation that he was denying prosecutions in a public corruption case. She said she didn’t ask about the timing of indictments, tell him what she thought he should do or pressure him, and said the allegation was made by someone else.

Asked if Wilson said anything else during the conversation, Iglesias said Wilson never told her the allegation came from someone else. And she left out a key fact in her statement, Iglesias said.

“She wanted to talk about the ‘so-called’ sealed indictments – something I could not talk about,” Iglesias said.

Iglesias said he felt the calls were inappropriate but admitted not reporting them.

“Sen. Domenici had been a mentor to me… and Heather Wilson was a friend,” he said, adding that he felt a conflict between his loyalty to them and his duty to report what he claims happened.

Now go read the rest at Haussamen.

Think Progress has some video clips of Iglesias' testimony this morning.

More Local Blog Coverge:
Avelino Maestas over at Live From Silver City has some excellent commentary and analysis, and counters the desperate spin being applied by a couple of local Republican bloggers. As usual, Joe Monahan has the inside track on what his notorious political "alligators" are saying around the state on the case, and always has something compelling to add. We're blessed with some excellent political blogs here in the Land of Enchantment these days, so visit them often to get a good idea of what New Mexicans are thinking and saying about the important stories emerging locally.

Breaking: Heather Wilson Admits Calling Iglesias

Rep. Heather Wilson (R, NM-01) claims she was trying to "help" U.S. Attorney David Iglesias when she called him about his public corruption investigations. Click for her complete statement. A Washington Post article also reported:

Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) acknowledged today that she contacted a federal prosecutor to complain about the pace of his public corruption investigations, as the Senate Ethics Committee signaled that it had opened a preliminary inquiry into a similar communication by the state's senior senator, Pete V. Domenici (R).

... "I did not ask about the timing of any indictments and I did not tell Mr. Iglesias what course of action I thought he should take or pressure him in any way," Wilson said in a statement to the Washington Post. "The conversation was brief and professional."

... Wilson said in her statement that many of her constituents had complained about "the slow pace of federal prosecutions" in corruption cases and said she was told by one unidentified constituent that "Iglesias was intentionally delaying corruption investigations."

Wilson also said she was trying to help Iglesias: "If the purpose of my call has somehow been misperceived, I am sorry for any confusion. I thought it was important for Mr. Iglesias to receive this information and, if necessary, have the opportunity to clear his name."

... Iglesias, one of seven U.S. attorneys fired by the Justice Department on Dec. 7, is expected to testify to Congress tomorrow that Wilson and Domenici were indeed trying to sway the course of his investigation. [emphasis mine]

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.

Patricia Madrid Weighs in on Iglesias Firing

Las Cruces blogger Heath Haussamen has an exclusive interview about the David Iglesias firing with former Attorney General Patricia Madrid, who was Rep. Heather Wilson's Democratic opponent in the November 2006 election in NM-01. Just go read it. Quite the scoop. Former reporter Haussamen is doing some stellar work these days ....

(Updated) Video of Iglesias KRQE Interview and More on Wilson - Domenici Ethics Scandal

UPDATE: Albuquerque's KOB-TV Eyewitness News 4 has video of their interview with David Iglesias.
************

Albuquerque's KRQE News 13 aired a live one-on-one interview yesterday with fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias conducted by news anchor Dick Knipfing. Click to watch video. Iglesias states that he got two separate calls on two separate days during the period of mid-to-late October 2006, each by a different member of the NM Congressional delegation, not staffers. Iglesias also said:

"I felt leaned on, I felt pressured to take immediate action."

"It's the only time during my five and a half year tenure as U.S. Attorney that I got a call from any member of Congress discussing any specific case or investigation.

"No recordings, and I'm reviewing possible documents I may be taking to the house for their review."

[Iglesias was asked] "When was the corruption matter going to be made public? When was I gonna go forward on prosecutions?"

A U.S. House Justice subcommittee has issued subpoenas to Iglesias and three other fired U.S. Attorneys and will hear their testimony on Tuesday. In addition, the Senate Judiciary Committee is sending letters to the same four asking them to testify voluntarily on Tuesday. If their testimony provides even a hint of possible unethical behavior related to their firings by a U.S. Justice Department headed by Bush toady Alberto Gonzales, Congressional Democrats are expected to launch one or more full-fledged ethics investigations into the matter. If that happens, the headlilnes nationwide and locally will no doubt be extremely damaging to the political futures of both Rep. Heather Wilson (NM-01) and Sen. Pete Domenici (D-NM). A post on Talking Points Memo has C-SPAN video of Sen. Chuck Schumer talking about the firing of Iglesias in terms of "politics of the worst sort."

The latest dispatch from McClatchy Newspapers, which broke much of the initial information on the firings, quotes two unnamed sources "familiar with the contacts" by members of the NM Congressional delegation about the calls:

Wilson was curt after Iglesias was "non-responsive" to her questions about whether an indictment would be unsealed, said the two individuals, who asked not to be identified because they feared possible political repercussions. Rumors had spread throughout the New Mexico legal community that an indictment of at least one Democrat was sealed.

Domenici, who wasn't up for re-election, called about a week and a half later and was more persistent than Wilson, the people said. When Iglesias said an indictment wouldn't be handed down until at least December, the line went dead.

As for how the growing scandal might affect the expected prosecution of alleged criminal offenses related to the construction of two state courthouses in NM, McClatchy reported:

The alleged involvement of the two Republican lawmakers raises questions about possible violations of House of Representatives and Senate ethics rules and could taint the criminal investigation into the award of an $82 million courthouse contract.

NPR also interviewed Igelsias yesterday. Click to listen. Excerpts:

The first call was in mid-October. The caller was asking –- this was not a staff member, an actual member of Congress -- the person was asking about “I want to know if there are any sealed indictments.” And I said, “Sealed indictments? We only do that for juvenile cases or national security cases. It’s fairly unusual.” Instantly red flags went up. I didn’t want to talk about it. Federal prosecutors can’t talk about indictments in general until they’re made public. So I was evasive, I shucked and jived like Walter Payton used to for the Chicago Bears, and the call was ended rather abruptly....

Approximately a week and a half later I got a second call from another member of Congress wanting to know about when the corruption matters were going to filed. Again, red lights went on. It was a very unpleasant phone call, because I know that members of Congress should not be making phone calls about pending matters, pending investigations, indictment dates, things of that nature.

Asked why he didn't want to name the callers, Iglesias said:

Because frankly, I’m afraid of retaliation. I live in a very small state with a very small legal community. And I’m frankly afraid if I go public right now, that there could be retaliation in terms of me being blacklisted, blackballed… you pick your adjective.

(Updated) New Mexico Democrats: Move Now to Capture Domenici's Senate Seat

UPDATE: Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo reports that many reporters are staking out Sen. Domenici and Rep. Wilson today, trying to get a response to the Iglesias story. Nothing yet.
*******************

On the heels of the unfolding scandal about what looks to be the very improper firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and seven others, Jonathan Singer at MyDD echoes the calls I'm hearing from many Democrats in New Mexico. Democrats should go after Pete Domenici's Senate seat in a serious, organized way. Recommended start? How about Rep. Tom Udall, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, Mayor Marty Chavez, or other A-list candidates rethinking a challenge against Domenici? And how about some spending on tv and/or radio ads calling Domenici (and Rep. Heather Wilson) out on alleged conduct unbecoming in the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias? Singer says:

I have written for some time that New Mexico's aging Republican Senator, Pete Domenici, should be among the Democrats' top targets in 2008, not only because his conservative views are way outside of the mainstream -- particularly for a state as balanced politically as New Mexico -- but also because his Jim Bunning-like actions (walking around the Senate in pajama bottoms) raise real questions about his competence to serve another six years. But new questions surrounding the possibility that Domenici abused his office for partisan political reasons should further enlarge the target on the Senator's back.

...  the headline remains that Domenici potentially used his office for partisan political gain, a big no-no, as it were. And given the possibility that Domenici just might not be up to a heated campaign that not only questions his fitness to serve but also his intentions and trustworthiness, it's incumbent upon the Democrats, both inside New Mexico and those trying to extend the party's majority in the U.S. Senate, to begin to put pressure on Domenici to retire rather than stand for reelection, as he has indicated an intention to do.

If this means an investment of $50,000 of $100,000 today for television and newspaper ads throughout New Mexico calling Domenici out for his alleged actions I think it would certainly be worth it.

Additionally the Democrats also need to ramp up their recruitment drive in the state. A number of potential Democratic heavyweights -- Rep. Tom Udall and Albuquerque mayor Martin Chavez, to take two examples -- have stated an unwillingness to run for the Senate in 2008 if Domenici were to run for reelection. Yet if they, or other candidates of their potential strength, were to flirt with a run today, they might, along with an ad buy by the DSCC or the Democratic Party of New Mexico, be able to sufficiently scare Domenici so that he decides against seeking another term. There is little potential downside to such a move but great potential upside, and as such there seems to be little reason to me why such a combined effort should not be undertaken at this point. [emphasis mine]

Come on folks. Imagine what would be going on if a Democratic Senator and Representative were being implicated in a rapidly expanding political scandal like this one. And yet, the Democratic Party of New Mexico has yet (to my knowledge) even issued a press release on this story or provided a quote to the media. Wake up out there!

The worst thing that could happen would be for NM Dems to sit on their hands while Repubs set up a plan to make excuses for Domenici's and Wilson's alleged outrageous conduct. Imagine a scenario where they manage to save enough of Wilson's reputation to insert her into the race for Senate at the last moment, with Domenici withdrawing. I could go on with possible scenarios, but the key point is that in politics, you have to strike when the iron is hot. Like now.

Political Fragging: Fired U.S. Attorney Iglesias Drops Bombshell on NM Repubs

In a story that continues to explode on the national scene, New Mexico's U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, who was recently fired by the federal Justice Department and accused of bad performance, held a news conference on his last day in office yesterday to defend his record as a federal prosecutor and blame politics for his firing. Even more damning, he told McClatchy Newspapers that he was called by two members of the NM Congressional delegation about a month prior to the 2006 election and asked pointedly about when he would announce indictments in a case involving possible criminal counts related to two state courthouse projects, as well as queried about details in the case.

In response to Iglesias' revelations, both a U.S. House Justice subcommitee and the U.S. Senate Justice Committee are considering issuing subpoenas to Iglesias and several other U.S. attorneys fired by the Bush administration under similar circumstances. The subpoenas would compel the attorneys to testify about their firings before the Congressional committees, and Iglesias has said he would comply with the orders if issued. In recent weeks, it was announced that six U.S. attorneys around the country, including Iglesias, would be removed from office and replaced by the Bush administration due to alleged "performance issues." Two others are also being replaced for unstated reasons. Many are asking questions about the real reasons behind the firings.

Soon after Iglesias' statements about calls from members of Congress were made public, Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM2) said he wasn't one of those who called Iglesias. Rep.Tom Udall (D-NM2) and Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) also denied they were the callers. That leaves just two possible culprits -- Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM1) and Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) -- and so far their offices have refused comment to the media. It has long been rumored that Wilson and Domenici may have been pressuring Iglesias to bring the courthouse case indictments before the election in November 2006 in order to help Rep. Wilson's reelection prospects against Dem challenger Patricia Madrid. In a tight race, Wilson ultimately beat out Madrid by a razor thin margin of less than 900 votes.

A post yesterday on The Carpetbagger Report by Steve Benen, the lead editor of Salon.com's Daou Report, had this to say, citing stories published by TPMmuckraker.com and McClatchy Newspapers:

Yesterday, David Iglesias, the U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, described his firing as “political fragging.” Iglesias added, “I’m OK with being asked to move on for political reasons, I’m NOT OK with the Department of Justice wrongfully testifying under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee that I had performance issues.”

Today, Iglesias started airing the dirty laundry.

The U.S. attorney from New Mexico who was recently fired by the Bush administration said Wednesday that he believes he was forced out because he refused to rush an indictment in an ongoing probe of local Democrats a month before November’s Congressional elections.

David Iglesias said two members of Congress separately called in mid October to inquire about the timing of an ongoing probe of a kickback scheme and appeared eager for an indictment to be issued on the eve of the elections in order to benefit the Republicans. He refused to name the members of Congress because he said he feared retaliation.

Two months later, on Dec. 7, Iglesias became one of six U.S. attorneys ordered to step down for what administration officials have termed “performance-related issues.” Two other U.S. attorneys also have been asked to resign.

Iglesias, whose performance reviews included no criticisms, said, “I believe that because I didn’t play ball, so to speak, I was asked to resign.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) responded by noting that Iglesias’ allegations are “extremely serious and very troubling allegations coming from a man of great integrity. They call into question every other firing.”

... now that we know partisan prosecutions played a role in the purge, it should renew interest in the administration’s decision to fire San Diego U.S. Attorney Carol Lam during her Duke Cunningham investigation.

The McClatchy Newspaper story also reported:

Iglesias acknowledged that he had no proof that the pressure from the members of Congress prompted his forced resignation. But he said the contact violated one of the most important tenets of a U.S. attorney's office: Don't mix politics with prosecutions.

"I was appalled by the inappropriateness of those contacts," Iglesias said of the calls.

... Iglesias said the two members of Congress not only contacted him directly, but also tried to wrest details of the case from him.

An article in today's Albuquerque Journal adds more to this story,

There has been grumbling for months within the state Republican Party and legal community that the investigation into possible contract padding in state courthouse construction projects has been conducted at a snail's pace. The original allegations— involving contractors, public officials and millions of dollars— were brought to the U.S. attorney and the FBI more than 18 months ago.

... And Iglesias told the Journal after the news conference that he began losing the support of important state Republican Party leaders after the 2004 election when he didn't prosecute anyone for voter fraud.

Also check out this post on Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo that cites information first published by the New Mexico Politics with Joe Monahan blog. Monahan's coverage of the story continues today, including speculation about the possible political fallout that may damage the political futures of Rep. Wilson and Sen. Domenici (above right) due to the unethical nature of the accusations. More will be revealed.

ALERT: Concerns Raised About Proposed ABQ Clean Elections Regulations

From Common Cause NM:
Albuquerque- Common Cause New Mexico is raising concerns about recently released by the Albuquerque City Clerk for the upcoming 2007 municipal election. The regulations were developed to administer the "Open and Ethical Elections" charter amendment that was approved by Albuquerque voters in 2005.

At stake is the proper functioning of the public funding provisions of the new law, according to Matt Brix, Executive Director of Common Cause.

"Albuquerque voters passed the Open and Ethical Elections Referendum by an overwhelming 70% margin back in October 2005, making us the first city in the country to pass a clean elections measure by popular referendum," says Brix.  "Over a year has passed and the 2007 municipal election cycle is already underway.  Making sure we get these regulations right has become an urgent task, if the new system is to run smoothly as the voters intended."

The Albuquerque City Clerk is holding a hearing to receive public comment on the new regulations this Monday, February 26, at 3 PM in the City Council Chambers.

"There has been a good faith effort to prepare these regulations for public review," says Brix, "but several critical areas need fixing and Monday's hearing is the public's final opportunity to fix these problems."

Common Cause has identified a number of problem areas in the new regulations, such as:

• Inconsistencies with the reporting requirements for seed money contributions and regular campaign contributions. The City left out disclosure of a contributor's business and occupation in the reporting requirement for seed money contributors.
• Rules that define what independent versus coordinated expenditures are.
• Vague language that could delay by weeks matching funds to a candidate whose opponent exceeds the voluntary limit on expenditures.

Editor's Note: Those concerned about the proper implementation of the Albuquerque Open and Ethical Elections amendment are urged to attend Monday's hearing. You can also send your comments to the Albuquerque City Clerk and urge her to respond appropriately to the concerns raised by Common Cause:

Millie U. Santillanes, City Clerk
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1293; Albuquerque, NM 87103
Physical Address: City-County Bldg., One Civic Plaza, 11th Fl.
Phone: (505) 768-3030; Fax: (505) 768-2845
Email: msantillanes@cabq.gov