RNC Commission Investigation Whitewash

by: Grace Kelly

Wed Jan 14, 2009 at 23:44:59 PM CST

One of the most well documented outrages was the very-directed too-close repeated use of pepper spray. Yet this is the language the report uses (highlights are mine):

The Commission has learned that the use of pepper spray is very low on the use of force continuum as applied during the RNC and is preferred over physical contact. This assumes, however, a defensive use of pepper spray to ward off attack, or a general use of the spray to clear a wide area. At times during the RNC, however, law enforcement directed pepper spray at specific individuals, in an offensive fashion. In one particular incident on September 1 we observed on video, a woman, who was standing still immediately in front of advancing MFF units on Kellogg, was repeatedly doused with pepper spray, rather than arrested. Such apparent uses of pepper spray as an offensive weapon troubled the Commission. One police leader told the Commission that offensive use of pepper spray aimed at a specific individual would not normally be an acceptable use of force. Given this, we believe that what appears to be the apparent excessive use of pepper spray as an offensive weapon against specific individuals may warrant further review.

OK, what has the rest of us speaking in bold no-nonsense terms is something that the RNC commission says "may warrant further review" . (And do read that, dripping with sarcasm!) Does Co-Chair Thomas Heffelfinger and Co-Chair Andrew Luger as prosecutors normally pepper their summations with "at times" this person had done "what appears to be" "unacceptable use of force", which therefore "may warrant further review?"  

Heffelfinger's resignation and the U.S. Attorney "purge"

by: smit2174

Thu Mar 15, 2007 at 13:27:01 PM CDT

A week ago, I wrote a diary about Minnesota's new United States Attorney, Rachel Paulose, and her possible connection to the "attorney purge" scandal currently engulfing the White House and the Department of Justice. I speculated that the resignation of the previous U.S.A., Thomas Heffelfinger, was related to the current scandal, and it seemed clear to me that the 33-year-old Paulose was chosen because of her her political connections to the conservative establishment and the Republican Party rather than her being the most qualified candidate for the job.

On Tuesday, Minnesota Public Radio interviewed Tom Heffelfinger, and he claimed that politics played no role in his resignation:

The former U.S. attorney for Minnesota says he never felt political pressure from the White House that allegedly led to the firings last year of eight other U.S. attorneys around the country. On Tuesday, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales admitted the firings were mishandled, but rejected calls for him to resign. Tom Heffelfinger stepped down from the Minnesota post a year ago, but he says politics wasn't the reason. 

[...]
 

Tom Heffelfinger resigned his post as U.S. attorney in Minneapolis last February. He had served two stints -- the first from September 1991 to April 1993, and then again from September 2001 to February 2006.

He says no one ever pressured him to leave his post or asked him to leave. He resigned based on a personal decision, driven by his career and his family finances. Moreover, he says he was not pressured to investigate Democrats.

"I got no direction whatsoever at any time during this administration, or my last tour as U.S. attorney, to consider politics," he said. "To the contrary, partisan considerations are irrelevant to a public integrity investigation."

Read below the jump to examine my evidence.