Welcome, USDOJ.


Thank you for visiting The Grievance Project.  (Statcounter and Sitemeter information is at the end of this post).

Earlier today, your boss, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey, testified before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Attorney General Mukasey concluded his prepared remarks with the following statement:

As I have said many times, to members of the public and to Department employees, it is crucial that we pursue our cases based solely on what the law and facts require, and that we hire our career people without regard for improper political considerations. It is equally crucial that the American people have complete confidence in the propriety of what we do. My promise to you is that I have done, and I will continue to do, what I can to ensure that politics is kept out of decisions about cases and out of decisions about career hiring at the Department of Justice.

I wouldn’t doubt that the minimal attention that Attorney General Mukasey has paid to the politicization at DOJ is, in fact, the outer limit of what he can or will do (or is allowed to do) to ensure that politics is kept out of the Department. What he has done, however, is simply not enough. If you’re an attorney at DOJ, whether in Arlington, Virginia (according to Statcounter), Washington, D.C. (according to SiteMeter) or elsewhere, you are likely to have an affirmative obligation under the rules of professional conduct in which you’re admitted to report the ethical violations of other attorneys, such as Alberto Gonzales, Kyle D. Sampson, Lisa Murkowski, Harriet E. Miers, Mark Everett Fuller, John Yoo and Michael B. Elston and Esther Slater McDonald, who engage in conduct that raises questions as the attorney’s fitness to practice law. Specifically, Rule 8.3 of the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduc (.pdf) states that

A lawyer having reliable information that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law shall inform the appropriate professional authority.

I encourage you to file a grievance against any former or current DOJ attorney who you know has breached his or her ethical obligations.

Rule 8.3 of the Washington, D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct similarly provides that

A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.

VISITOR ANALYSIS
Referring Link No referring link
Host Name wdcsun23.usdoj.gov
IP Address 149.101.1.123 [Label IP Address]
Country United States
Region District Of Columbia
City Washington
ISP Us Dept Of Justice
Returning Visits 0
Visit Length 5 mins 19 secs
VISITOR SYSTEM SPECS
Browser MSIE 6.0
Operating System Windows XP
Resolution Unknown
Javascript Disabled

Navigation Path

Date Time WebPage
July 9th 2008 05:51:21 PM No referring link
grievanceproject.wordpress.com/state-grievance-procedures/
July 9th 2008 05:56:40 PM No referring link
grievanceproject.wordpress.com/state-grievance-procedures/
Domain Name usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address 149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
ISP US Dept of Justice
Location
Continent : North America
Country : United States (Facts)
State : Virginia
City : Arlington
Lat/Long : 38.8782, -77.1054 (Map)
Language unknown
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; DOJ3jx7bf; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022)
Javascript disabled
Time of Visit Jul 9 2008 5:51:28 pm
Last Page View Jul 9 2008 5:56:48 pm
Visit Length 5 minutes 20 seconds
Page Views 2
Referring URL unknown
Visit Entry Page http://grievanceproj…rievance-procedures/
Visit Exit Page http://grievanceproj…rievance-procedures/
Out Click
Time Zone unknown
Visitor’s Time Unknown
Visit Number 1,827

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Advertisements

13 Responses

  1. How freaking cool are you! ;-)

  2. Since you asked me, I’d have to say ‘very,’ but the answer to that question will vary greatly depending on who you ask.

  3. ask me, ask me! e.m. is very, very cool!

  4. Thanks, Nonnie. I’m up to 3, now, with your vote.

  5. I have 4 kids and a hubby that vote in the affirmative.

  6. I’m up to 8, now. A new personal best.

  7. Hey, EM. I just did a post on Siegelman discussing being contacted by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility. The DoJ asked Seigelman attorneys for evidence. Siegelman says this is absurd because the OIG and OPR are the ones with the phenomenal cosmic power to be gathering evidence.

    Does it sound to you like the direction of these DoJ investigations will go against Siegelman if this is the path they are on? That the investigations are illegitimate? Wheel-spinning in an effort to stall the corruption cases in to oblivian?

  8. Hey Mel,

    You are more than welcome to leave a link to this or any other post.

    I left a reply, but it didn’t show up on my computer, so here’s a copy:

    Mel,

    The plot continues to thicken in the Siegelman matter. However, I don’t believe Gov. Siegelman will see any justice come from either DOJ IG or DOJ OPR. To specifically answer your questions

    Does it sound to you like the direction of these DoJ investigations will go against Siegelman if this is the path they are on? That the investigations are illegitimate? Wheel-spinning in an effort to stall the corruption cases in to oblivian?

    Yes*. Yes. Yes.

    *But only in the sense that the decisions will likely find no wrongdoing by DoJ prosecutors.

  9. I cut and pasted your response to my site, too, since it advances the story. It’s getting a lot of hits, today.

  10. So, it’s really all in the hands of the 11th Circuit. DOJ is an incestuous hall of horrors at this point unable to right itself.

  11. That, state bar grievances and maybe Attorney General John Edwards.

  12. May I ask why this doj.gov IP is constantly visiting my website? I also found many others with a different number on a similar string.

  13. I like to think that I’m being watched because I write the truth and the truth is dangerous to those who obstruct justice. I’m sure not doing it for the money or the publicity.

    I don’t know why they might be watching you. And if you do know why they’re watching you, don’t tell me, the internet is not private. Go hire an attorney.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: