US Attorneys story goes front page and onto Bush's desk

The "surging" case around the US Attorney firings has now reached the President's desk.

Last October, President Bush spoke with Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to pass along concerns by Republicans that some prosecutors were not aggressively addressing voter fraud, the White House said Monday. Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, was among the politicians who complained directly to the president, according to an administration official.

Looking at who the complaints came from and how they passed through the White House, it is clear that the "firing offense" was not prosecuting cases that would aide Republican election efforts.

Kyle Sampson, Gonzales' top aide on these firings (who resigned over all this yetserday,) phrased their firing offenses this way in a memo to Harriet Miers in 2005.

Sampson sent an e-mail to Miers in March 2005 that ranked all 93 U.S. attorneys. Strong performers "exhibited loyalty" to the administration; low performers were "weak U.S. attorneys who have been ineffectual managers and prosecutors, chafed against Administration initiatives, etc."

Also, take a look at the mechanics of of a coverup/firewall. Sampson is taking the fall in an attempt to protect Gonzales and the rest of the administration from perjury before Congress.

The aide in charge of the dismissals -- his chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson -- resigned yesterday, officials said, after acknowledging that he did not tell key Justice officials about the extent of his communications with the White House, leading them to provide incomplete information to Congress.

And, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino isn't beyond shaping the language to protect her boss,

Perino also acknowledged Monday that complaints about the job performance of prosecutors occasionally came to the White House and were passed on to the Justice Department, perhaps including some informally from President Bush to Gonzales.

Or maybe a better example,

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said that "it doesn't appear the president was told about a list nor shown a list" of U.S. attorneys at any point in the discussions.

We're now deep into phase II of the scandal, the "partial admission" phase and beginning to see phase III, the appointment and resignation of scapegoats.

Many scandals die right here. The kicker is phase IV, the breakdown phase. The breakdown phase is where someone from inside the scandal comes forward to tell their tale, punching holes in the carefully crafted partial admissions and setting the wolves on the scandal members.

This person is usually either someone within the scandal facing consequences (usually legal) or someone outside the loyalty ring who sees this moment as an opportunity to twist a knife.

One of the few "successes" of this administration is that their crazed belief in loyalty has cut off innumerable scandals at this point. Really, would Harriet Miers or Alberto Gonzales turn on Bush any more than Libby turned on Cheney?

(BTW, I'm waiting for the Republican talking point that all these "distractions" on the White House are helping the terrorists and undermining the "war on terror?")

Also: Does anyone else find it a little sad that after torture, renditions, secret prisons, wiretapping, databasing, phone records, and all the rest came off the desk of Alberto Gonzales, this may be the scandal that reaches him?