DOJ Refuses to Answer Questions About Government Employees Working on Detainees

The original letter to Attorney General Holder was sent on November 24, 2009, and Senator Grassley did not receive a reply back from Holder until February 18, 2010? What took Holder so long to answer the questions? In his answer you discover that the DOJ does not keep records on conflicts of interest.

Out of nine lawyers with a potential conflict, Holder named only two. How about the other seven?

Of the nine mentioned (there could be more), five represented detainees and four contributed to amicus briefs or advocated for the detainees. Today these nine are all working in areas related to detainees, but Holder sees no conflict of interest?

The following paragraph comes from Holder's letter explaining how the DOJ does not keep track of conflicts of interest:

With regard to the specific requests in your letter, the Department does not maintain comprehensive records of such information about individual Department employees. We have, however, obtained information responsive to your interests from the Office of the Attorney General, the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office of the Associate Attorney General, the Office of Legal Counsel, the Office of the Solicitor General, the National Security Division, the Civil Division, and the Criminal Division. To the best of our knowledge, during their employment prior to joining the government, only five of the lawyers who serve as political appointees in those components represented detainees, and four others either contributed to amicus briefs in detainee-related cases or were otherwise involved in advocacy on behalf of detainees. None, as far as we are aware, did so as registered lobbyists. Others had no involvement in representing detainees or other entities in detainee cases, but came to the Department from law firms where other lawyers represented detainees, often on a pro bono basis. (It is not surprising that this should be the case: as best as we can determine, of the 50 largest U.S. law firms, at least 34 have either represented detainees or filed amicus briefs in support of detainees.) Among senior Department leadership, the last category includes the Attorney General, the Acting Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, and the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. In addition, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division previously represented one Afghanistan detainee, and his former employer represents other detainees. (Source: Senator Grassley Website.)

The most important part of this paragraph was to learn some of these detainees are defended by these large firms on a 'pro bono' basis. Some of those same lawyers who did pro bono for detainees now work for DOJ.

With these former law firm employees now inside the DOJ working on detainee issues, all of a sudden Holder decides detainees should be tried in Federal Court not by Military Tribunals? That brings into question if the reason that Obama/Holder want these cases moved into Federal Court is so these large law firms who are "friends of the Administration" will get a huge payout from the Government for defending these cases to make up for their pro bono work.

It smells rotten, and the Holder letter has done absolutely nothing to take the stench away.

For Immediate Release
February 19, 2010
Administration Refuses to Answer Questions About Government Employees Working on Guantanamo Detainee Issues at the Justice Department

WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley today said that the Department of Justice’s inadequate response to his questions about the government employees charged with advising the Attorney General on Guantanamo detainee issues reeks of secrecy within the department.

Grassley asked questions about the apparent conflicts of interest at the Justice Department at a November 18 oversight hearing. During the hearing, Attorney General Eric Holder only committed to “consider” Grassley’s request for a list of Justice Department attorneys who may have conflicts of interest with detainee issues being worked on at the department.

“I asked for names, cases and recusals and in return I received a 5 page letter of bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo that failed to sufficiently answer my simple questions,” Grassley said. “I’ve held nearly 30 constituent listening posts in Iowa since the first of the year and they are upset about the direction our national security is headed. They want to know who is advising the President and the Attorney General, especially after it’s become very clear to Americans across the country that misguided decisions on terrorism policy are being made. An answer like I received today doesn't live up to the transparency in government President Obama promised and doesn’t sit well with me or Iowans.”

Grassley said it’s incomprehensible that the Department of Justice does not maintain comprehensive records on conflicts of interest information on such an important issue. He said it also raises questions how serious the department is about national security.

Following the hearing, Grassley led Senate Judiciary Committee members in a letter to urge the Attorney General to fully answer questions he asked about conflicts of interest in detainee policies at the Justice Department.

“…Public accounts of apparent conflicts of interest by those crafting terrorism and detainee policies raise serious concerns that need to be addressed,” the Senators wrote.

Click Here for a copy of the press release with the letter to Holder from Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, followed by an editorial from the November 22 issue of the Washington Times.

A copy of the letter to Grassley from the Department of Justice can be found by clicking here.

Source: Senator Grassley's Senate Site