Thread: Shameful Conduct At the Dept of Justice

As reported today (7/28) an internal Justice Dept investigation confirmed allegations that certain hiring practices violated the law via the use of ideological limits tests in terms of the hiring/firing of department employees. This type of shameful conduct, by a branch of the government that is supposed to be a-political, undermines the concept of an independent Justice Department. Quite unfortunate what has happened under the present administration.

Originally Posted by billyjeff2

As reported today (7/28) an internal Justice Dept investigation confirmed allegations that certain hiring practices violated the law via the use of ideological limits tests in terms of the hiring/firing of department employees. This type of shameful conduct, by a branch of the government that is supposed to be a-political, undermines the concept of an independent Justice Department. Quite unfortunate what has happened under the present administration.

While it is shameful, I doubt that it is unique to the current administration. Its a little artless to believe any portion of government apolitical. A quaint thought, in theory, but just that. Even the judiciary is politicized. Government's business, as currently construed, is politics. The disgrace preceded the current administration and will continue after it passes. Doesn't excuse it, doesn't come close, but it is like seeing a cop speeding. Who do you expect to ticket him? Another cop, guilty of the same infraction?

Originally Posted by billyjeff2

As reported today (7/28) an internal Justice Dept investigation confirmed allegations that certain hiring practices violated the law via the use of ideological limits tests in terms of the hiring/firing of department employees. This type of shameful conduct, by a branch of the government that is supposed to be a-political, undermines the concept of an independent Justice Department. Quite unfortunate what has happened under the present administration.

While whatever it is is supposedly shameful, for clarifications' sake, what exactly is an "ideological limits test"? I know we all recently had to take part in an ethics survey as well as training, but don't know if "ethics" count the same as "ideological limits" really.

Most of the things people decry this administration for are things that have been on in reality for quite a few administrations. Government does not like change as a general rule and even if a procedure they have is wrong it wouldn't surprise me if quite a few people, rather than read the voluminous regulations concerning their job, simply continue doing it the way their predecessor showed them, and so on.

Anyway, looking for clarity on what a "ideological limit test" is, exactly. If it is a test to determine ethics of an employee (e.g. would you report blatant fraud from a coworker?) then I think the test should remain and the law should change, however unfair it may seem that we ask someone to be ethical.
I'm not sure, however, that's exactly what they are, so I'll sit back and read you gentlemens' replies.


John P.

Originally Posted by ProfessorChaos!

While it is shameful, I doubt that it is unique to the current administration.

The length of the attempted obfuscation is, as are the refusals of the involved parties to even show up at Congressional hearings.

My original post contained an typo--I meant to use the phrase "litmus test" rather than "limits test". As far as the specifics of what was done wrong at the DOJ--
From the Washington Post:
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. The inquiry faulted Monica Goodling , saying she asked career job applicants about politics and their views on abortion and gay marriage.
IMPROPER PROCEDURES




That aide, Monica M. Goodling, 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 yesterday 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 Justice during the Bush administration.

Breaking news:
SOME POLITICIANS PLAY STUPID PARTISAN GAMES

film at 11.

Ahhh. Litmus test.
That makes sense. Shouldn't be happening at any rate.

John P.

Originally Posted by jockeys

Breaking news:
SOME POLITICIANS PLAY STUPID PARTISAN GAMES

film at 11.

And when they break the law, they should go to jail. Ask Stevens.

Originally Posted by ScottS

And when they break the law, they should go to jail. Ask Stevens.

who is stevens?

Possibly a reference to Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska. The longest serving Republican Senator in US history who was recently indicted on corruption charges.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/wa...tevens.html?hp