From wire reports
WASHINGTON
For nearly two years, a young political aide sought to cultivate a "farm system" for Republicans at the Justice Department, hiring scores of prosecutors and immigration judges who espoused conservative priorities and Christian lifestyle choices.
That aide, Monica Goodling, a 1999 graduate of the Regent University School of Law in Virginia Beach, exercised what amounted to veto power over a wide range of critical jobs, asking candidates for their views on abortion and same-sex marriage and maneuvering around senior officials who outranked her, including the department's second-in-command.
An extensive report by the department's Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility concluded Monday that Goodling and others had broken civil service laws, run afoul of department policy and engaged in "misconduct," a finding that could expose them to further scrutiny and sanctions. The report depicted Goodling as a central figure in politicizing employment decisions at the Justice Department during the Bush administration.
Goodling declined to cooperate with investigators, who instead interviewed 85 witnesses and scoured documents and computer hard drives to prepare their report. Last year, she trembled as she told the House Judiciary Committee that she "crossed the line" by asking improper questions of job seekers to gauge their political leanings.
But the report and accounts from lawyers who worked alongside Goodling, 34, at the Justice Department provide a far more extensive examination of her dominance during her time as the department's White House liaison and counselor to the attorney general. One source said staff members called her "she who must be obeyed."
Thirty-four candidates told investigators that Goodling or one of her deputies raised the topic of abortion in job interviews and 21 said they discussed same-sex marriage, the report said. Another job applicant said he admired Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, only to watch Goodling frown and respond, "But she's pro-choice."
She and her aides regularly gave candidates for career civil service jobs a form designed for political appointees that sought information on party affiliation and financial contributions. When job seekers sometimes raised objections, Goodling replied that the form was a mistake, showing that she was "aware that it was improper," the report said.
A longtime prosecutor who drew rave reviews from his supervisors was passed over for an important counterterrorism slot because his wife was active in Democratic politics, and a much less-experienced lawyer with Republican leanings got the job, the report said. Another prosecutor was rejected for a job in part because she was thought to be a lesbian. And a Republican lawyer got high marks at his job interview because he was found to be sufficiently conservative on the core issues of "god, guns (plus) gays."
John M. Dowd, an attorney for Goodling, said Monday that she deserved praise, not scorn, for her "exceptional candor" with Congress last year. "Each and every one of the core conclusions of the OIG/OPR report... is consistent with and indeed derived from Ms. Goodling's testimony before the House Judiciary Committee," he said.
The 140-page report appeared to confirm the suspicions of congressional Democrats and raised fresh questions about the reputation of the Justice Department, which has been roiled since the resignations of more than a dozen top officials last year, including Goodling, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Gonzales' chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson. The report also found that Sampson had engaged in misconduct by systematically involving politics in the hiring of immigration judges.
Investigators cited discrepancies in information provided by Goodling, Sampson and former press aide John Nowacki, who, like Goodling, received his law degree from Regent University, founded by Virginia Beach religious broadcaster Pat Robertson. But they stopped short of concluding that the conduct rose to the level of a criminal violation.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., said Monday that he had directed his staff to consider whether there were grounds to refer allegedly inconsistent statements for possible criminal prosecution. Attorneys for the former Justice Department officials scoffed at the idea, and independent lawyers following the case said it was likely that officials who had left the department would face only ethics inquiries in connection with breaking civil service laws.
Current and former department lawyers said they were appalled by the deep reach of the political hiring, which affected hundreds of rejected job seekers and as many as 40 immigration judges who were recruited under the political criteria. Those judges may remain on the bench because their career civil service jobs carry significant employment protections.
In several instances, candidates for immigration posts were solicited directly from the White House political affairs and personnel offices, as well as Republican congressmen, without ever being formally posted to the public, according to the report.
Then-White House adviser Karl Rove once recommended a childhood friend for a judgeship in Chicago, to which the lawyer was named in October 2005 after a months-long delay.
"The finger was on the scale," a career lawyer in the immigration office wrote in an e-mail at the time, which was later cited by investigators.
Gonzales told investigators that he was unaware of the illegal hiring practices his aides were using.
"It's simply not possible for any Cabinet officer to be completely aware of and micromanage the activities of staffers, particularly where they don't inform him of what's going on," said George J. Terwilliger III, Gonzales' attorney.
Gonzales' statements to Congress last year about the firings of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006 and other subjects remain under investigation by the inspector general.
This story was compiled from reports by The Washington Post and The New York Times.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Oops - spelling
Ha! You're right Kenny W, in my haste I misspelled ridiculous and also didn't add an "s" to law schools. I'll admit when I made a mistake. I still received an excellent education from Regent Law School and am a darn good attorney! :)
A poster below
is a graduate of Regent Law School and practicing law and spelled ridiculous "rediculous". In my opinion, spelling is a very important part of an education so that raises questions in my mind.
The reason Regent is being blasted...
is because Ms. Goodling was not qualified for the position and broke the law, and many other Regent grads were being hired at the DOJ -- what a shock. The fact remains that To those who stated that this behavior by the DOJ is "no big deal" -- turns out it is, and will become a bigger deal when the DOJ has to pay out MILLIONS in damages. It is absolutely disgusting what Bush and Gonzalez have done to the DOJ, and Mukasey will probably do nothing as well -- equally disgusting. By the way, why is misconduct in quotations in the headline when misconduct is evident? I can see the next Pilot headline: Man 'Murdered' in Robbery Attempt.
Hamilton
Goodling is accused of political screening of "career positions" with the Department of Justice, specifically against the law…period. She was not screening the political appointments, which have historically been the prerogative of the administration in power.
She knew it was illegal, but her motivation was to create a core of right wing, Christian career bureaucrats in the DOJ.
That is the problem.
She was the White House liaison to the DOJ, and that indicates, to me, a deliberate effort to flaunt the law for ideological reasons and to pervert the neutrality of the DOJ.
Again, she broke both the law and DOJ policy, deliberately and with full backing of those in power.
Let's be fair here.
It's unfair and inaccurate to describe either Regent or ODU as not being respected. ODU is a reputable state university designed to serve students primarily from Eastern Virginia, and it does so well. Regent's law school's reason for being is to send well-educated Christians out to change the world. Its academic standards have steadily improved and will likely continue do so until they inevitably run up against the stone wall of the school's extreme faith position, which is where the problem lies. So far, the Gooding stories haven't focused on her abilities as a lawyer, but rather on her illegal and unethical infliction of her Christian standards, which have no place in government, on federal hiring. You put people who believe their law is above that of the land in positions of power, this is what happens.
Man I missed it.
Next time I will chime in earlier. I was tied up all morning.
Some Socratic Thoughts
Let me say first that if Ms. Goodling has broken the law she should receive its full measure, however:
Can any of those persons repulsed by her actions truely say that had she been pro-choice and committed to gay marriage that anyone applying with the USAG's office would not have been subjected to a pro-choice/pro-gay litmus test regardless of merit? Would you chastise her for doing so, and if so, would you lay blame with just her or also with the institutions from which she came?
Does not the winner of an election have the right to choose those individuals of like mind and political bent? Are there not more qualifed conservative justices than Brennan or more qualified liberal justices than Thomas? Did not Democrat Senators vehemently oppose some qualified Bush appointees to the Federal bench for nothing more than they did not square with a Democrat litmus test?
If you do not like the outcome of a President's choices, work to beat him or his party the next time around. This is why elections matter. (Democrats take note, I do not think Obama will choose someone like Justices Roberts or Scalia regardless of merit.)
Had Ms. Goodling attended a Muslim law school and
Wilkerson come on
That's just not the case. Did you ever think some people may LOVE Virginia Beach/ Princess Anne County and they just don't want to leave. Can you name me another Law School in Virginia Beach or even Tidewater? Regent isn't that bad. It is getting better students every year. Give it a chance.
Hmm
VB Attorney I find your comments interesting. I'm anxious to know how your personal beliefs and "devotion to god" were factored into your grades?
Misinformed...
It really is a shame to see that those who have such a grudge against Pat Robertson are willing to say anything to bash the Law School. A_smith's allegations that Regent grads can't get jobs at regular law firms and work as paralegals is rediculous. I keep in contact with many of my classmates of 2005 and have not heard of one person having to take a paralegal job. My classmates are working at top firms in the area, working for the State as prosecutors and public defenders, and are working as Clerks for every level of court. Wilkerson3's comments are equally absurd - most people who go to Regent applied and were accepted in a variety of law school, but chose Regent because of its unique approach to teaching law. While there are those students who go to Regent for the convenience, or because they were not accepted elsewhere, that number is a small minority. Take it from someone who actually has a clue about Regent, is currently practicing law, and not someone who will spew forth hatred without knowing the facts simply because of their personal feelings about Pat Robertson.
Bias?
Why put "Regent grad" in the headline? How does Goodling's alma mater have anything to do with what she allegedly did? When another official gets into trouble is their alma mater plastered into the headline? I suspect a small bit of bias on the part of the Pilot in this matter. Every story that I have read regarding Regent in the Pilot has painted Regent in a negative light.
Nomorepub!
Must be nice to be so certain of Jesus' politics!!!
I believe in the compassionate conservative movement, which you disallow when you say that all Republicans/conservatives are either smart and greedy or a bunch of sheep.
Remember, poll after poll shows that R's of all income levels give a higher percentage of their salary to charity than D's of all income levels. I am not good at linking in to documents (not as computer literate as some of you young pups), but someone provided that link on this board about a month ago and even the Democrats in the discussion said that the polling organization was a real one and not "spin."
I think there may be a lot of R's who follow what Jesus said to do, to quietly give to the poor without blowing a trumpet to call attention to themselves, so it appears that they don't exist (at least to the folks for whom image is everything). Cheers, MGM (who knows that in our family, that is what we do)
Most students enter Regent Law ...
...because they can't get in anywhere else!
a_smith
a_smith I guess if everyone that you know in the "legal profession" is concerned than so am I.
not surprised
This is not surprising at all. Back when the Founder's Inn opened, I applied for a waitress job while I was going to TCC part-time. The job application asked if I was Christian, what denomination, what church I belonged to, how many times a week I went to church, etc...Next came the interview. It was more of the same. I was stunned. I belong to a very nice church, but really didn't see how that was relevant to the job I was applying for. I'm sure that same type of stuff was drilled into her during her time at Regent. Gonzales wasn't aware of her practices? How convenient!
Unfair criticism
Many forget Regent School of Law is a very new institution. They have made improvements by leaps and bounds, now competing with many of the top schools in scholastic competitions. They have hired a new Dean of the Law School and encourage diversity and free thinking. Contrary to many of the comments Regent Law Grads are finding gainful employment in the Tidewater Area at top firms. Regent Law more and more will be considered an asset to Tidewater. Monica Goodling graduated from Regent so what. It doesn't everyone at Regent is Monica Goodling. George W. Bush is graduate of Yale. Does that mean that everyone from Yale has a hard time speaking in complete sentences?
So the Pilot Attempts to Smear Regent Again?
By the way, I never hear outrage from the anti-Christian bigots out there when homosexual activists attempt to use the force of law to force others to accept and endorse their behavior. Where were you when Elane Photography was taken before the Human Rights Commission in New Mexico for refusing to photograph a same-sex "wedding"? Where were you when E-Harmony was sued by a lesbian for not offering same-sex dating services? Where were you when a church was sued in New Jersey for Refusing to rent out its property for a lesbian "commitment ceremony"?
Why does your outrage only flow one direction?
People do not understand the critical mass that we are approaching on this issue. The day that you think you can use government force to get me to accept your behavior is the day that government ceases to have the consent of the governed.
So the Pilot Attempts to Smear Regent Again?
I must ask, how does where one attended school have anything to do with how one behaves during future employment? Does the Pilot post stories headlined "Harvard Grad steals money from Mutual Fund? when a Harvard grad engages in such impropriety?
Perhaps the Pilot simply has an axe to grind with Regent?
That aside, I am amazed at the bigots on this board. I wonder how many of them would be outraged if a homosexual activist engaged in the same behavior that Goodling is accused of. In fact, given that homosexuals are granted preference when it comes to getting into law school in the first place, and many law firms actively recruit homosexuals and lesbians, why is so much outrage directed at Goodling?
I was in Monica's class Regent 1999
Imagine trying to graduate from this school as I and my friends did, in a class full of 100 Monicas where one's beliefs and "devotion to christianity" are also factored into final grades and graduate assistant positions. In my opinion, after spending three years from 1996 to 1999 in this institution, the characterization of the atmosphere in the DOJ is not surprising in the least. Regent conditions its graduates to think as Monica does, to think that they are capable of judging one's character and devotion to Christ based on answers to a questionairre. Remarkably, some of us graduate and go on to fulfilling legal careers without losing our christianity or tricking ourselves into believing that we can judge what is in others' hearts based on limited information.
The atmosphere at Regent was ten times harsher on christians than either the secular high school or college in which I attended. The reason is that over half of the students and professors are convinced that anyone who doesn't believe exactly as they do should not be associated with. Ironically, I do believe in the values that Monica expoused; so, I probably would have passed her litmus test. But who are we to judge what is
unfortunate regent
I was shocked to learn that Regent is an accredited school. As far as everyone I know in the legal profession is concerned, Regent is nothing but Bible Camp with suits. Regent grads are notorious for not being able to obtain regular practicing positions in any halfway decent firm, and for having to take paralegal positions in the hope that the firm's partners will eventually bring them on board.
unfortunate regent
I was shocked to learn that Regent is an accredited school. As far as everyone I know in the legal profession is concerned, Regent is like Bible Camp with suits. Regent grads are notorious for not being able to obtain regular positions in decent law firms, and opting for paralegal positions in the hope that the partners will eventually let them come on board.
It's sad that this school happens to be located in our area. There are so many creative, professional companies and people who work in Norfolk and at the Beach, and the presence of Regent just really tarnishes our image.
Normally a reader not a responder
I normally just enjoy reading how ridiculous the republican party makes themselves look on these pilot on line debates but I had to comment on this one. It's interesting and telling how not one repub/conservative christian has come forward to support Ms. Goodling or her alma mater for this article.
I have first hand knowledge of how very crooked and evil the whole Pat Robertson organization is. I had a family member (I won't reveal which in case of retribution) who worked very closely with them and came away even more jaded and against Christianity than he was when he first walked in there.
I have come to the conclusion there are two types of republicans. The first are the very intelligent people who are only concerned with their own welfare and money and how to get as much out of other people. The other category are the poor saps who cannot think for themselves and follow what their religious leaders say is the correct way (the religious "leaders" are in the first group). I am devoutly Christian and believe if Jesus walked the earth today he would most certainly be riding his donkey for the democratic party.
McDonald is a regent graduate
Lets not forget that Attorney General Bob McDonald, the one who wrote the unconstitutional transportation law, is also a Regent graduate. Funny how you dont see those graduate on Regents billboards.
like father like son
I would like to know when The Pilot plans to report on Gordon Robertson's extramarital affair and how his "holy prophet of God" daddy helped him keep the affair hidden as those two fakes continued their on-air healings and words of knowledge and telling their viewers to confess THEIR sins and repent.
The report did "NOT" stop short of identifying criminal conduct
Contrary to the silly claim in the article that "they stopped short of concluding that the conduct rose to the level of a criminal violation", the report states that these Bush lackeys DID violate federal laws.
In sum, the evidence showed that Sampson, Williams, & Goodling violated federal law & Department policy, & Sampson and Goodling committed misconduct, by considering political & ideological affiliations in soliciting & selecting IJs, which are career positions protected by the civil service laws.
The problem here is that the DOJ now has to investigate the DOJ, which is laughable considering that head DOJer Mukasey has already chosen to ignore malfeasance of the Bush admin.
Pat Robertson
In addition to the original poster, let's not forget that Mr. Robertson spent years preaching the sins of premarital sex, only to eat crow when it was learned during his presidential campaign bid that his wife was months pregnant when they said their I do's. The fact that one of his followers was found to be involved in this type of underhandedness doesn't surprise me in the least.
1
1
Good ole Pat!
Well it is certainly time for a change in the white house. I about died when I saw Pat R. doing that commercial with Al sharpton. Hell really must have frozen over that day!
Put blame where blame is due!
When are people going to stop using this scandal to attack Regent Law School? Was Yale Law School chastised for Clinton's misconduct with Monica Lewinski? Was Duke Law School responsible for Nixon's Watergate scandal? Of course not! Excellent lawyers come out of all of the aforementioned law schools, including Regent. To lump all of Regent's law students and graduates together as power hungry Bible thumping idiots is irresponsible and ignorant. Most students enter Regent Law with a desire to learn about the law from a Christian perspective - not to become Pat Robertson's croanies. As a graduate, I can tell you that Pat Robertson had nothing to do with my decision to attend Regent and I rarely saw him during my time there. I got an excellent legal education, have passed two states' bar exams on the first try and have helped thousands of people both in public and private service. For a relatively new law school, Regent is garnering national prominence as it continues to dominate national Moot Court and Negotiations competitions - beating the likes of Harvard, Yale and Duke. So give credit where credit is due and put blame where it belongs!
Hate to say it, but
Yes, Regent has a bad reputation, as does ODU. I know that a lot of families send their kids to ODU because it's close to home, but outside of Hampton Roads, both schools are not well looked upon, especially in the presence of the other quality state schools, such as UVA, William and Mary JMU, Tech, etc. And if you want to get a job outside of the area, the name of the school on your resume DOES count for something. I hate saying it because I'm here, and I get the close to home quality, but I'm not from here, and I know what people in the rest of the state think. Sorry!