Minnesota Lawyer Blog

So, we find out yesterday during Monica Goodling's testimony before the House Judiciary Committee that somebody at the Department of Justice thought that former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger was spending too much time on Native American issues. Now I might be a bit old fashioned here, but isn't that maybe the kind of thing that maybe someone should discuss with him rather than just adding his name onto a list for firing? I wonder if the folks down in D.C. were aware that the Red Lake school shootings were a pretty big deal here. ...

In any event, if I were Rachel Paulose I would be opening a bottle of champagne, ... errr ... lemonade. I don't think Goodling's testimony could have gone any better for her. Goodling and Paulose became friends after Paulose was hired as interim U.S. attorney. They did not know each other prior to the start of the hiring process.

So, despite being roasted over a spit by the media in connection with the firings controversy, it now appears Paulose's only "crime" on that score was being a smart young conservative with a Yale Law pedigree in the right place at the right time. Or maybe I should say the wrong place at the wrong time. How many of us would want to take the nonstop beating leveled at her by the media for the last two months -- even if it came with a business card saying that you were the U.S. attorney?

There are, of course, internal managerial issues at the local U.S. Attorney's Office still in the process of being addressed. Now that the eye of this national storm has passed, maybe the office can finish hammering those out and get back to doing more things like helping to bust up that "sex slavery" ring. Just a thought.

In any event, it is now up to Paulose to succeed or fail on her own merits, which is as it should be.

It's Monica Goodling day at the House Judiciary Committee, and so far the former Justice Department liaison to the White House has come out swinging, the Washington Post's Capitol Briefing blog reports.

"In her opening statement, Goodling attacked outgoing Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, accusing McNulty of not being 'fully candid' in his remarks to the Senate Judiciary Committee and then inappropriately blaming her for not fully briefing him," the blog says.

The blog also reports: "Goodling is proving to be a tough witness under early questioning, as she contends that she played no role in putting names on the firing list and placing more emphasis for that decision-making process on the shoulders of D. Kyle Sampson, the former [Attorney General Alberto] Gonzales chief of staff."

For more and for further updates from the blog, click here.

The ancient Chinese curse says, "May you be born in interesting times." Well, this week will be an interesting time at the Department of Justice with Monica M. Goodling, the department's former liaison to the White House, gearing up to give her much-anticipated testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. Goodling, you may recall, left the DOJ in April after invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in reference to her role in the U.S. Attorneys firings. She has received a limited grant of immunity to provide the testimony.

Add to the mix the fact that the Senate is threatening to take up a no-confidence vote against U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales as early as this week, and you have quite a chain of events shaping up.

I can't quite decide whether this is a good or a bad week for Justice -- all depends on your point of view, I guess.

The Justice Department will not try to prevent Congress from granting immunity to a former department official to testify about the firing of eight federal prosecutors, the Pioneer Press reports on its website.

In a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., officials from two Justice Department offices investigating whether the department played politics when hiring prosecutors said they would prefer not to see the department's former White House liaison, Monica Goodling, given immunity.

"However, we understand the committee's interest in obtaining Ms. Goodling's testimony," the letter said. "Therefore after balancing the significant public interest against the impact of the committee's actions on our ongoing investigation, we will not raise an objection or seek a deferral."

For more, click here.