Posted on 07/28/2008 5:41:32 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
Internal investigation concludes that former attorney general aides Monica Goodling and Kyle Sampson broke department policies and federal civil-service laws.
Former White House liaison, Monica Goodling, was singled out for violating federal law and Justice Department policy by discriminating against job applicants who weren't Republican or conservative loyalists
WASHINGTON -- Top aides to former Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales employed a political and ideological litmus test to weed out candidates for career and other positions at the Justice Department, an internal department report concluded Monday.
The audit by the department's Office of Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility concluded that former Gonzales aides Monica Goodling and Kyle Sampson violated department policies and federal civil-service laws.
Both Goodling and Sampson left the Justice Department last year amid the tumult surrounding the alleged politicization of its ranks under Gonzales that included the politically charged firing of nine U.S. attorneys. It was unclear whether either individual would be disciplined since they had left government.
Gonzales himself was generally unaware of his aides' actions, and took steps to head off untoward hiring practices when he became aware of them, the report concluded. Gonzales' lawyer issued a statement Monday saying the findings vindicate the former attorney general.
The report provides a more detailed examination of questionable moves by Goodling and others that emerged in congressional hearings last year. Goodling, after receiving a grant of congressional immunity, acknowledged before the House Judiciary Committee that she had "crossed a line" and allowed political and other impermissible factors to affect her hiring decisions.
Goodling was the White House liaison at the Justice Department; Sampson was Gonzales' chief of staff.
EXCERPT MORE:
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
...... Politics Affected Hirings
The old spoils system where the party that wins an election claimed the right to reward its own ("qualified"?) people by giving them federal jobs. So defined the purpose of the Civil Service Commission and the institution of the merit system in 1883 to cover most federal employment. To be a Partnership of equals.
Remember, in 1881, President James A. Garfield was assassinated by a so reported disgruntled (no mention of unstable mental background in need of anger management) job seeker.
So goes and will still continue to go: "To the victors go the spoils". "The survival of the fittest". "The greased wheel runs best, not the grinding."[mol] Next? ongoing attempt to attack the Bush Administration to get at the Old Guard and the so implied imbred candidacy of John McCain under the file tab: "McCain's Experience and Obama's..."nihil, nihilum, nil".
It’s perfectly fine when Clinton erased everone from the Reagan and Bush 1 administrations...
In D.C. if you fire a conservative, you’re applauded. If you fire a Liberal you’re indicted.
Clinton fired all federal prosecutors didn’t he?
I guess that wasn’t politically motivated though. LMAO
This situation is absurd. Presidents can remove or hire federal prosecutors on their discretion.
...and how is this any different when Janet Reno was in the US Attorney’s office? Oops! It was the same!
JoMa
......Presidents can remove or hire federal prosecutors on their discretion.....
But you miss the point......they can’t fire the auditors. Auditors are civil service
yawn zzzzzzzzzzzz
If civil service individuals were involved, then I’m going to have to agree with you.
I will say that I don’t think any new ground has been broken under this administration or Justice Department though.
Hey, enforce this laws on us, but enforce them on the Democrats too. Has anyone heard of Linda Tripp?
The Clinton cancer is deep in the organization
tv viewers have short memories.
they do not remember, if they even knew, what the clintons did on this issue.
This brouhaha is not about those types of new administration dismissals of other party appointees. It's about the dismissal of some attorneys who were appointed by the new administration from their own party. Except for dismissal for misconduct, there is no precedent for that type of dismissal in either the Reagan or Clinton administrations.
The investigation seems to be about whether or not the attorneys were dismissed for reasons other than job performance, i.e. political or other, to quote the article,"impermissible factors".
Yes..agree with you.
I remember a friend telling me his dad applied, very smart guy, for a postal job in a small town and because of his party affiliation was not hired--decades ago. I "believe" was under JFK.
Most Americans could care less at this point. And just another DU screamin' 6-word sentence talking point. Also, much of the News has been turned off by many Americans this summer, but for oil/gas prices and Obama blowing off the troops when overseas. Taxpayer money used by his entourage to fly, dine, security, and shop, but not appropriate to visit our American heroes.
So this story might as well be on Page 9.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.