justice department

The U.S. government sued to block AT&T Inc.’s proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA Inc., saying the deal would “substantially lessen competition” in the wireless market.

The Justice Department complaint was filed today in federal court inWashington. The U.S. is seeking a declaration that Dallas-based AT&T’s takeover of T-Mobile, a unit of Deutsche Telekom AG (DTE), would violate U.S. antitrust law and a court order blocking any arrangement implementing the deal.

“AT&T’s elimination of T-Mobile as an independent, low- priced rival would remove a significant competitive force from the market,” the U.S. said in its filing.

We already pay some of the highest cell rates in the world and removing competition will do nothing but insure that those rates stay high. Hopefully the DOJ succeeds in this suit and the merger never happens.

This is a huge story and one that could make or break the Obama presidency:

As promised, a federal judge has issued an injunction blocking the military from enforcing Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Judge Virginia Philips last month found the policy unconstitutional in her ruling on a lawsuit brought by the Log Cabin Republicans and said she would issue an injunction blocking the Defense Department from enforcing the policy and discharging openly gay servicemembers.

The Justice Department objected.

"A court should not compel the executive to implement an immediate cessation of the 17-year-old policy without regard for any effect such an abrupt change might have on the military's operations, particularly at a time when the military is engaged in combat operations and other demanding military activities around the globe," attorneys said in their objection, filed in U.S. District Court in California.

The big question now is rather President Obama will abide by the decision or if he will try some legal maneuvering around it.

It’s about time:

Federal prosecutors said Friday they are investigating whether there was "willful criminal activity" by the company that operates the West Virginia coal mine where 29 workers died in an accident last month.

The U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of West Virginia said in a letter that investigators are looking into possible criminal conduct by the mine's operator, Performance Coal, and its directors, officers and agents.

The letter, obtained by The Associated Press, asks the Labor Department to hold off pursuing dozens of civil cases against Performance for alleged mine safety violations.

Performance is a subsidiary of Massey Energy Co., which owns the Upper Big Branch mine.

Last month, federal law enforcement officials said the FBI had interviewed nearly two dozen current and former employees of Massey in the probe. But the Justice Department declined to publicly confirm there was a criminal investigation.

And hopefully they are doing the same with BP and the oil rig blast.

Now I know a lot of people, mostly on the right, will be outraged by this. They will start asking how we can hold these companies criminally liable, but we must. It’s time for a CEO to answer to the same laws as any other citizen.

Just received a breaking news alert from the Washington Post regarding this:

The FBI illegally collected more than 2,000 U.S. telephone call records between 2002 and 2006 by invoking terrorism emergencies that did not exist or simply persuading phone companies to provide records, according to internal bureau memos and interviews. FBI officials issued approvals after the fact to justify their actions.

E-mails obtained by The Washington Post detail how counterterrorism officials inside FBI headquarters did not follow their own procedures that were put in place to protect civil liberties. The stream of urgent requests for phone records also overwhelmed the FBI communications analysis unit with work that ultimately was not connected to imminent threats.

A Justice Department inspector general's report due out this month is expected to conclude that the FBI frequently violated the law with its emergency requests, FBI officials confirmed.

There is a lot to digest in the 4 page article, so I’ll just direct you over to the Washington Post’s site to read the rest.

CBS had posted this update earlier today:

Update 1:59pm E.T.: A Justice Department official familiar with this subpoena just told me that the attorney general's office never saw it and that it had not been submitted to the department's headquarters in Washington, D.C. for review. If that's correct, it suggests that U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison and Assistant U.S. Attorney Doris Pryor did not follow department regulations requiring the "express authorization of the attorney general" for media subpoenas -- and it means that neither Attorney General Eric Holder nor Acting Attorney General Mark Filip were involved. I wouldn't be surprised to see an internal investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility; my source would not confirm or deny that.

So is it still Obama’s fault? Ummm – NO! Now the big question lingers – did AG Mukasey see this subpoena? Going by all known dates and times it very well could have fallen under his watch. Maybe the OPR will find out for us.

There is a ton of outrage going on over the Justice Department’s brief filed in a challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, and that outrage is rightfully so. But there is something lacking in the discussion that has emerged – the fact that there are still a lot of unfilled positions in the DOJ.

One example is Tony Perez. He was appointed in April to be the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights division, yet there hasn’t even been a hearing yet to confirm him. Tony West, who heads the civil division and signed off on the brief was just confirmed on April 20th. With all these vacancies still at the DOJ that means the people who have managed to get through the confirmation are picking up the extra slack.

That’s the reason there are still so many Bush hold appointees at DOJ. Its not the Obama wants them – its that Obama is stuck with them.

Until the Senate Judiciary Committee gets going, and Republicans stop blocking, we can expect to see poor decisions by the DOJ. My guess is that neither President Obama nor AG Holder had any idea that brief was being filed, let alone that the case may have even existed.

Its not making excuses for the piss-poor brief, but rather a statement of the facts. I don’t think we can even fully call it Obama’s DOJ and may not be able to until 2010.

Breaking news from the Washington Post:

Former top White House official Karl Rove will be interviewed tomorrow as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into the firing of U.S. attorneys during the Bush administration, according to two sources familiar with the appointment.

Rove has remained in the news as a commentator and political analyst since departing the White House. In an essay in today's Wall Street Journal, he criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), arguing that she may have misled the public about her knowledge of detainee interrogation tactics that critics assert are torture.

As a senior adviser to President George W. Bush, Rove emerged at the center of numerous policy and political debates. He will be questioned tomorrow by Connecticut prosecutor Nora R. Dannehy, who was named last year to examine whether any former senior Justice Department and White House officials lied or obstructed justice in connection with the dismissal of federal prosecutors in 2006.

Robert D. Luskin, a lawyer for Rove, declined comment this afternoon on the imminent interview. So did Tom Carson, a spokesman for Dannehy.

Hey I got an idea. If Rove doesn’t say what the prosecutors want then why not waterboard him? I mean its such an effective procedure as him and his party has been pointing out!

"A sad day for Alaska yesterday when he was found guilty of seven felonies. But -- and now he needs to do the right thing, and the right thing is, as he's proclaiming his innocence and proclaiming, too, that he will go through the appellate process, OK, then he needs to step aside and allow our state to elect someone who will be supportive of those ideals of America: the free enterprise, the missions that we're on, to win the war, those things that have got to take place in order to progress this country. Ted Stevens has got to play a very statesmanlike role in this now."

That was Sarah Palin talking about Ted Stevens last October. Now she thinks that Mark Begich should resign so Alaska can hold another election, despite Begich wining fair and square.

I think what really gets me on this whole thing is how Republicans acted when the Democrats started talking about problems at the Bush Justice Department. Democrats were on a “political witch hunt” according to all those on the right. Now that the flaws of Bush justice has ensnarled one of their own, the Republicans want to declare a mulligan. Sorry, but this is the price you –pay for putting party loyalty above country.