Low-key office launches high-profile inquiry (Attorney Firings and Karl Rove)

[RamboLiberal]

Source: LA Times

Most of the time, an obscure federal investigative unit known as the Office of Special Counsel confines itself to monitoring the activities of relatively low-level government employees, stepping in with reprimands and other routine administrative actions for such offenses as discriminating against military personnel or engaging in prohibited political activities.

But the Office of Special Counsel is preparing to jump into one of the most sensitive and potentially explosive issues in Washington, launching a broad investigation into key elements of the White House political operations that for more than seven years have been headed by chief strategist Karl Rove.

The new investigation, which will examine the firing of at least one U.S. attorney, missing White House e-mails, and White House efforts to keep presidential appointees attuned to Republican political priorities, could create a substantial new problem for the Bush White House.

First, the inquiry comes from inside the administration, not from Democrats in Congress. Second, unlike the splintered inquiries being pressed on Capitol Hill, it is expected to be a unified investigation covering many facets of the political operation in which Rove played a leading part.

"We will take the evidence where it leads us," Scott J. Bloch, head of the Office of Special Counsel and a presidential appointee, said in an interview Monday. "We will not leave any stone unturned."



Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-probe24apr24,0,3535547.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[aquart]

1. What does anyone know about Scott J. Bloch?

This is all I found and it ain't good.

<http://www.counterbias.com/307.html>


Scott J. Bloch is another Bush appointee who has a problem with equality and civil rights, especially when applied to gay and lesbian Americans employed by the federal government... OSC's primary mission is to safeguard the merit system by protecting federal employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices, especially reprisal for whistleblowing." That's "whistleblowing" about federal corruption as well as "prohibited personnel practices" (such as sexual harassment) perpetrated against federal employees.

In January 2004, George W. Bush's choice to head the Office of Special Counsel began his reign. Since then, Scott J. Bloch has not only ignored President Clinton's executive order - which the Bush administration said it supported and wanted continued - but Mr. Bloch has removed all protections for gay and lesbian federal employees and, by his actions, condoned and encouraged "prohibited personnel practices" against them. His record with "whistleblowers" is just as bad.

One of Mr. Bloch's first moves as Special Counsel - in February 2004 - was to remove from OSC complaint forms and its official web site all references to "sexual orientation." Is it any surprise that while at the University of Kansas, Bloch enrolled in the Integrated Humanities Program, a curriculum established in 1971 to counter the anti-war and women's movements and the growing demand for greater multiculturalism on campus? Is it any surprise that Mr. Bloch has bluntly refused to investigate any claims of "sexual harassment" involving gay or lesbian federal employees?

Is it any surprise that Mr. Bloch has ignored competitive recruitment practices by unilaterally hiring his investigators from among new graduates of Ave Maria Law School? Is it any surprise that Bloch hired Alan Hicks, his son's former headmaster, for a one-year, $112,000 position that produced one - that's one - four page memo? (Alan Hicks left his headmaster position after the cover-up of a predatory priest scandal had been exposed.)

[maddezmom]

2. was just looking around...found this:

"We are limited by our enforcement statutes as Congress gives them," Bloch said, responding to a question from Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.). "The courts have specifically rejected sexual orientation as a class protection."

Bloch made his remarks in a nearly two-hour hearing into his controversial 17-month tenure as head of the independent federal agency charged with safeguarding the federal merit system and protecting whistle-blowers from retaliation.

Since taking office in January 2004, the Bush appointee has been accused of failing to enforce a long-standing policy against bias in the federal workplace based on sexual orientation, unnecessarily reorganizing the OSC to try to run off internal critics, and arbitrarily dismissing some personnel complaints and whistle-blower disclosures in an effort to claim reductions in backlogs.

He has denied such allegations and argued that he has made the agency more efficient at processing cases and, at the same time, more receptive to whistle-blowers and federal workers who have suffered unfair treatment.

The controversies -- especially last year's flap over sexual orientation discrimination -- have brought unflattering attention to an agency that typically has worked outside the limelight. In April 2004, the White House took the unusual step of clarifying its position on protections for gay men and lesbians in government workplaces, protections observed for three decades.

~snip~

Senate panel members of both parties admonished Bloch for his handling this year of an internal reorganization in which 12 career employees were told that they would be involuntarily transferred to new assignments in Dallas; Oakland, Calif.; and a soon-to-opened field office in Detroit. Bloch initially gave the workers 10 days to accept the moves or be terminated, and he extended the deadline only after receiving complaints from some lawmakers. Several employee advocacy groups accused Bloch of targeting workers who had been critical of his management style -- allegations Bloch strongly denied.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/24/AR2005052401496.html

[IndianaGreen]

11. Mr.Bloch's resume is that of an experienced white washer

I'll be surprised if anything comes out of this.

[salin]

16. how depressing.

[maddezmom]

3. Special Counsel Accused Of Intimidation in Probe

Special Counsel Accused Of Intimidation in Probe
Contact With Investigators Controlled, Employees Say

By Elizabeth Williamson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 16, 2007; Page A21

A trouble-plagued whistle-blower investigation at the Office of Special Counsel -- whose duties include shielding federal whistle-blowers -- hit another snag this week when employees accused the special counsel of intimidation in the probe.

The Office of Personnel Management's inspector general has been investigating allegations by current and former OSC employees that Special Counsel Scott J. Bloch retaliated against underlings who disagreed with his policies -- by, among other means, transferring them out of state -- and tossed out legitimate whistle-blower cases to reduce the office backlog. Bloch denies the accusations, saying that under his leadership the agency has grown more efficient and receptive to whistle-blowers.

Special Counsel Scott J. Bloch is under investigation by the Office of Personnel Management's inspector general because employees said he retaliated against those who disagreed with his policies. (By Lois The probe is the most serious of many problems at the agency since Bloch, a Kansas lawyer who served at the Justice Department's Task Force for Faith-based and Community Initiatives, was appointed by President Bush three years ago. Since he took the helm in 2004, staffers at the OSC, a small agency of about 100 lawyers and investigators, have accused him of a range of offenses, from having an anti-gay bias to criticizing employees for wearing short skirts and tight pants to work.

The 16-month investigation has been beset by delays, accusations and counter-accusations. The latest problem began two weeks ago, when Bloch's deputy sent staffers a memo asking them to inform OSC higher-ups when investigators contact them. Further, the memo read, employees should meet with investigators in the office, in a special conference room. Some employees cried foul, saying the recommendations made them afraid to be interviewed in the probe.

more:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501725.html

[RamboLiberal]

4. Oh boy - another Bushie

And probably another cover-up.

[maddezmom]

6. yup..more here: Hatching Bias

Hatching Bias
By Daniel Pulliam
[e-mail]

The Office of Special Counsel has been accused of political bias in enforcing the 1939 Hatch Act.


Amendments to a complaint filed against Special Counsel Scott J. Bloch in early March allege that OSC took no action on a complaint regarding then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice's use of government funds to travel in the weeks before the 2004 presidential election, but vigorously pursued allegations against Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry's visit to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

OSC refused to comment on the new allegations, but has stated previously that the allegations are "old and have been previously addressed."



Three nonprofit whistleblower protection groups - the Government Accountability Project, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and the Project on Government Oversight - and anonymous career OSC employees filed the initial complaint March 3, listing a series of prohibited personnel practices and violations of civil service laws by Bloch.


The politicization allegations stem from Bloch's decision to have a group of lawyers report to a political deputy rather than a career senior executive. The complaint states that OSC has pursued trivial matters without regard to political affiliation - such as the distribution of electronic mail - but has not evenly handled higher profile cases.

more:http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0305/040105lb.htm

[peacetalksforall]

5. A presidential appointee is going to lead an investigation into

the current key three targets of investigation? This is the most bizarre article I've read in thesesix plus years. Is this the ultimate in dis-reality (as promised to us). I don't trust the LAT. What is the reputation of Hamburger?

Is this something like the Warren Report and the Sep Commisson Report?

[peacetalksforall]

7. I predict they are going to move this along and tell Congress that

they don't have to have any more hearings. And bingo - they absolve themselves. zip nada zip speedo zip destroyer (of the Constitution).

Or - did someone get some religion?

[tblue]

8. This crew will never get religion. This does have the smell of a dog & pony show.

Let's raise hell in the blogosphere and contact our reps!

[tom_paine]

12. So this is what it would be like if Gotti was tasked to investigate Gambino

"Nothing to see here, and say, shouldn't we bring charges against the one who brought these false allegations?"

[peacetalksforall]

17. When we ask 'How stupid do they think we are?' - this gem might go

to the top of the list?

[Spiffarino]

9. Congress would be wise to ignore the OSC

Yet another fox in charge of another henhouse.

I predict an "extensive" investigation in which KKKarl is cleared and promoted to War Czar.

[Triana]

10. HERE Comes the Whitewash!!!! (n/t)

[truthisfreedom]

13. *YAWN*

Nothing to see here, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen. Just your usual pile of excrement.

[hlthe2b]

14. And, guess what? Rove has already been EXONERATED!!!

who'dda thunk.....:sarcasm:

Classical Roveian diversion tactic...

[Robbien]

15. The minute the article said the call for investigation came from inside Bushies Admin

You had to know this is one big CYA operation.

I wondered what their counter move to all the investigations would be. Just sitting back and letting Dems investigate them isn't what they normally would put up with.

[TeddyKGB]

18. Low-key office launches high-profile inquiry (of Karl Rove)

Source: Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — Most of the time, an obscure federal investigative unit known as the Office of Special Counsel confines itself to monitoring the activities of relatively low-level government employees, stepping in with reprimands and other routine administrative actions for such offenses as discriminating against military personnel or engaging in prohibited political activities.

But the Office of Special Counsel is preparing to jump into one of the most sensitive and potentially explosive issues in Washington, launching a broad investigation into key elements of the White House political operations that for more than six years have been headed by chief strategist Karl Rove.

The new investigation, which will examine the firing of at least one U.S. attorney, missing White House e-mails, and White House efforts to keep presidential appointees attuned to Republican political priorities, could create a substantial new problem for the Bush White House.

First, the inquiry comes from inside the administration, not from Democrats in Congress. Second, unlike the splintered inquiries being pressed on Capitol Hill, it is expected to be a unified investigation covering many facets of the political operation in which Rove played a leading part...

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-probe24apr24,0,3535547.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[Hugin]

19. Well, all slime trails do lead to Rover...

Shouldn't be too hard... But, we must be careful due to the fact this may be a faux investigation to
muddy the waters. Just like the voter fraud issue... Eh, KKKARL?

[AlinPA]

20. I don't get it: "inside the administration". Now how can that work? Sounds fishy to me.

[TeddyKGB]

21. A preemptive "investigation" by the Republicans

...ending in some sort of slap on the wrist for Rove - to make any Congressional investigations of Rove look superfluous?

[Writer]

22. This is crap.

How can any of us trust a special counsel's investigation into Rove's political activities by a WH that is fundamentally political, including the presidential-appointed special counsel? I think someone is creating a red herring investigation to render true investigations illegitimate.

On edit: Also, this story feels like a leak. There's no direct quotes. The journalist used an anonymous contact to put together this story.

[izzie]

23. I do not understand just what this is

--How can Bush and Co. look into anything it may do wrong. My God they seem to all be crooks. Maybe you mean this is just a govt. agency that has no political head but men who are just career workers? That would be good.

[TeddyKGB]

25. Which is probably the point

The more muddled the details, the less the more apathetic will understand it - like the Scooter Libby trial.

Now a blowjob in the Oval Office - that's something everyone can understand.

[williesgirl]

24. K&R - hope this isn't another phoney * ploy.

[sobanos]

26. The Office of Special Counsel will investigate U.S. attorney firings and other political activities

Source: L.A. Times

WASHINGTON — Most of the time, an obscure federal investigative unit known as the Office of Special Counsel confines itself to monitoring the activities of relatively low-level government employees, stepping in with reprimands and other routine administrative actions for such offenses as discriminating against military personnel or engaging in prohibited political activities.

But the Office of Special Counsel is preparing to jump into one of the most sensitive and potentially explosive issues in Washington, launching a broad investigation into key elements of the White House political operations that for more than six years have been headed by chief strategist Karl Rove.

The new investigation, which will examine the firing of at least one U.S. attorney, missing White House e-mails, and White House efforts to keep presidential appointees attuned to Republican political priorities, could create a substantial new problem for the Bush White House.

First, the inquiry comes from inside the administration, not from Democrats in Congress. Second, unlike the splintered inquiries being pressed on Capitol Hill, it is expected to be a unified investigation covering many facets of the political operation in which Rove played a leading part.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-probe24apr24,0,4453369.story?track=mostviewed-homepage

---

Let's get this ball rolling already............

[fasttense]

27. I'll bet they come up with only Democratic wrong-doing. n/t

[Robbien]

31. This is a duplicate thread, the real story behind this is that this is just a farce

see original thread for the real story
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2820174

This investigator is a Rove attack dog.

A Rove attack dog being put in charge of an investigation of Rove.

[sobanos]

33. Sorry about the duplicate............

I should have checked more thoroughly. :crazy:

I'll check out the other thread..........

[jaxx]

28. Seems like anytime they investigate themselves

they come out smelling like a rose. Move along folks, all is well. I will be surprised if this proves to be different.

[sobanos]

30. There's reason for HOP here............

From the article: "First, the inquiry comes from inside the administration, not from Democrats in Congress"

[quiet.american]

29. This sort of thing worked fine when there was a ne'er-do-well GOP majority -- things have changed.

Whatever whitewash they're planning, it will get thrown back into their faces by the gentleman from Vermont.

[Lobster Martini]

32. It's already a conflict of interest

All you have to read is that the head of the Office of Special Counsel is a presidential appointee. Right. No conflict of interest there. Wonder how long the investigation will take. Maybe until November 2008?

[Peace Patriot]

34. Ve-e-e-e-ry interesting! They are ve-e-e-ery worried about this.

That's my hit on it. Of course Bloch is a complete and total rotter. But notice what they did after the Plame/Brewster-Jennings outings? Remember how Bush said they were going to investigate it, and if anybody in HIS regime was involved, out they would go? Well, guess what they did? NOTHING. No investigation AT ALL. The Plame investigation was initiated by the CIA, direct to one honest man in the DoJ (Comey) who appointed Fitzgerald and made sure he could not be interfered with. The WH did NOTHING. Why? Because they had a Bush "pod people" Congress. But now that they have a Democratic Congress, with some strong investigators in charge of committees, they're taking action, oh, yes. Are they ever!

The WH not only did absolutely nothing to investigate the Plame/B-J outings, the WH counsel--one Albert Gonzales--gave the perps a 12 hour heads up, to shred papers and burn hard drives. Gonzales is a perp! His reward? Being appointed AG.

OH GOD, this is dirty. These people are so dirty, I can't even begin to describe how dirty they are. Think of all of the world's gangsters, racketeers, drug traffickers and assorted arms dealers and death squads, wrapped into one. That's our White House. The slime is just oozing out of it.

Well, we'll see what our Democrats do. Don't be surprised if they cave--however mind-boggling it may seem. Rove no doubt has dossiers on all of them, and when they haven't done anything wrong that could spice up a dossier, he has command of black ops to set them up.* All the more credit to those who stand up to him--if any do.

------------------------

*(I'm more and more convinced that that is what happened to our good Sec of State in Calif, Kevin Shelley. Shelley sued Diebold, decertified their touchscreens and demanded to see their source code, six months prior to the 2004 election. Then the "swift-boating" began--vague charges of corruption showing up in the newspapers, things like "misusing" federal election money. Turns out what that meant was: Shelley denying Fed funds to corrupt county officials for their touchscreen deals with Diebold. Shelley--a Democrat, elected in '02--was driven out of office, on entirely bogus charges like these--while the new Dem state leadership in the legislature either hid under their desks, or colluded with the bad guys. The Bush-appointed Fed overlords threatened a Fed investigation. Shelley had no personal money, no defense fund (tells you something about Shelley), and couldn't do his job under these circumstances, so he resigned. It was the ugliest thing I've ever seen happen in Calif politics--since the fascist campaign against Calif Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Bird, way back when. Totally unfair. Totally wrong. And then, Schwarzenegger APPOINTED Repub and Diebold shill Bruce McPherson as our Sec of State! McPherson illegally RE-certified Diebold touchscreens and began undoing all of Shelley's reforms. These were the voting machines at issue in the San Diego special election (Bilbray vs. Busby)--the ones corrupt officials were keeping in car trunks and garages. Of all of Diebold/ES&S's election theft machines, they are the worst. We now have a good Sec of State again, Debra Bowen--one of the miracles of the '06 elections (the people outvoting the machines). But what happened to Shelley remains indelible in my mind. And it has always smelled of Karl Rove. For instance, there was a bogus sexual harassment charge, from inside Shelley's Sec of State offices. Was this a plant? All the charges had this odor. Set-ups. Plants. Orchestration in the corporate media. And they all turned out to be completely without substance. Meanwhile, the Dem leadership was cringing in fear. Would they be next? If this could happen in Calif, what could be happening in DC, where Rove and the Bush Junta have even more power? What are they using their "Total Information Awareness" programs, and their secret budgets, and their pervasive, unmonitored, illegal domestic spying FOR? To "keep us safe"? Right.)