One of the editorials in the New York Times calls for more investigations into the New Hampshire Phone Jamming Scandal. While there have been some guilty pleas and people brought to justice over that, they correctly note that although there was White House involvement in that affair, it has never been properly investigated. But I would go further -- whoever is the next Attorney General Nominee must be questioned closely about what he intends to do about investigating possible White House involvement in this affair.
This brings up an important point about the Attorney General's office in general -- the new AG must be able to demonstrate independence from the President to the point where they are willing to conduct their own investigations in the event of misconduct by people from the White House. He must be willing to appoint an independent prosecutor in the event that there is a conflict of interest. In the event of Plamegate, Patrick Fitzgerald was able to bring a small amount of justice in this case, although there deserved to be a lot more.
And not only that, the new AG must also commit to nonpartisanship in his office. He must be willing to agree not to fire attorneys solely because they prosecuted people from the wrong party, or they refused to prosecute a Democrat for lack of evidence. The Senate must be willing to question Bush's nominee closely about these matters, even if he turns out to be someone who is totally non-controversial.
tags: new hampshire phone jamming paul hodes attorney general white house senate
links: digg this del.icio.us technorati reddit

