AP sources: Justice Dept. watchdog probing Mass. US attorney

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By ALANNA DURKIN RICHER and MICHAEL BALSAMO

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department’s inspector general has opened an investigation of the top federal prosecutor in Massachusetts, prompted by U.S. Attorney Rachel Rollins’ appearance at a political fundraiser featuring first lady Jill Biden, The Associated Press has learned.

An investigation by the department’s internal watchdog targeting one of the nation’s 93 U.S. attorneys — political appointees who are some of the highest-ranking federal law enforcement officials — is highly unusual. The ethics concerns surrounding Rollins threaten to undermine Attorney General Merrick Garland’s efforts to restore the Justice Department’s reputation for political independence after tumultuous years under Republican President Donald Trump.

The inspector general’s office is focusing on Rollins’ attendance at the Democratic National Committee event in July as well as her use of her personal cellphone to conduct official business, according to two people briefed on the investigation, which has been underway for weeks.

Also being examined is a trip that Rollins took to California that was paid for by an outside group, they said. They were not authorized to publicly discuss the ongoing investigation and spoke on condition of anonymity.



FILE - Massachusetts U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins addresses the media at the Moakley Federal Courthouse, May 24, 2022, in Boston. The Justice Department’s inspector general has launched a sweeping ethics investigation into Rollins, prompted by her appearance at a political fundraiser last summer, two people familiar with the matter tell The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File)


Read more: https://apnews.com/article/boston-jill-biden-donald-trump-massachusetts-merrick-garland-a9569d4ce6c037474d61ee0d53e28565?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_06

[onecaliberal]

1. Uhm, if Garland thinks this will hurt his "reputation" he's looking in the wrong fucking place.

I’m tired of him going after any dem who farts wrong but had to dot i’s and cross t’s with the serial criminal who killed a million people. This is just more complete fucking crap.

[Ocelot II]

2. The Inspector General is independent and does not report to the AG.

That's the way all the IGs work - they are independent of the agencies to which they are assigned. Garland would have nothing to do with, and no control over, the IG's investigation.

[Major Nikon]

15. I don't think there's much they can do if no laws were broken

They can send a report to the AG, but that’s about it.

[James48]

3. No, that's not ok.

Just attending an event isn’t necessarily problematic- it depends on what she was doing there. Attending? Or presenting?


The personal use of a cellphone for business- I understand that is now prohibited by formal policy within DOJ.

The trip paid by outside entity- anybody who has had a basic ethics training class in federal government service knows better.

I’ll wait to see the outcome of the investigation.

[former9thward]

5. Yes, it is a problem to attend political events.

DOJ Policy:

As you know, the Department’s policy prohibits non-career appointees from attending partisan
political events, e.g., fundraisers and campaign events, in their official capacities. In the past,
Department policy had permitted non-career employees to attend such events in their personal
capacities if their participation in the event was passive and they obtained approval prior to
attending the event. The Attorney General has now determined that non-career appointees may not
attend any partisan political events, even in their personal capacities. This new Department policy
applies to all partisan political events, whether open to the public or not, including campaign events
on Election Day

https://www.justice.gov/jmd/file/834496/download

[Major Nikon]

13. That memo was signed Aug 30th

The event in question happened in July. I suspect the event in question precipitated the memo. It would be hard to enforce a policy enacted after the alleged ethics violation.

I suspect the worst they will get her on is perhaps not asking for permission to go to the event, which wouldn’t be a Hatch Act violation regardless. They might cite her for personal use of a government cell phone which everyone who has had a government cell phone has done at one time or another.

Not exactly front page material, but maybe it was a slow news day.

[Karadeniz]

4. But Clarence Thomas can pose for photos with a Florida politician, submit false financial

statements, and is okay with his wife politicking.

[Ocelot II]

7. The Supreme Court, unfortunately, does not have an IG to oversee it

(IGs are part of the executive branch), and the ethics rules applicable to lower federal courts don't apply to the Supremes. It used to be assumed people appointed to SCOTUS would be ethical enough that they would police themselves.

[WheelWalker]

8. We are all equal in this Union; but of course

some are more equal than others.

[JohnSJ]

6. Why release this the day before the midterms?

[onecaliberal]

9. I think we all know the answer.

[JohnSJ]

10. Yup

[OldBaldy1701E]

17. Yup. (n/t)

[SunSeeker]

12. If the AP's source is in DOJ, that source violated policy.

It's DOJ policy not to make such announcements right before an election, and not to comment on investigations or even acknowledge if they exist, as IG Horowitz notes in the article.

But it sounds more likely that Tom Cotton is the "source," and is using the AP to do a political hit job.

From the article:

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said her appearance was a “blatant violation” of the Hatch Act by someone who is supposed to “act as a nonpartisan law enforcement official rather than as a partisan politician.” He asked Horowitz to investigate.

[SouthBayDem]

11. She's got a shady history.

Back when she was DA for Suffolk County, MA (the county that has Boston), in December 2020 she threatened to write a traffic ticket to a driver who merged in her lane as both exited a mall. (Eventually, a state investigation found no criminal or civil rights violations on Rollins' part.)

[SunSeeker]

14. No she doesn't. It's more like the AP's "sources" have a shady history.

From the article:

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said her appearance was a “blatant violation” of the Hatch Act by someone who is supposed to “act as a nonpartisan law enforcement official rather than as a partisan politician.” He asked Horowitz to investigate.

Gee, ya don't suppose Tom Cotton is the AP source and is using the AP to do a political hit job on a Democrat right before midterms, do ya?

[msfiddlestix]

16. I inferred the implication of Tom Cotton as the source

as the instigator and source