A little over two weeks ago - as everyone 'round here knows - FBI agents raided the Capital-area home of California Republican Congressman John Doolittle, ostensibly as part of an investigation into bribery and corruption stemming from convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Abramoff's closest Capitol associates.
Among Jack Abramoff's best friends in Washington are Rep. Doolittle and the congressman's wife, Julie Doolittle. Abramoff supposedly hired Julie Doolittle to do "fundraising," and supposedly Julie Doolittle performed that work for the fee for which she was paid by Washington uber-lobbyist Abramoff.
In response to the FBI raid, Doolittle has "temporarily" stepped down from his seat on the House Committee on Appropriations and is publicly steadfastly maintaining his innocence. He is proclaiming his innocence despite the fact that he has not been charged with anything.
As part of his denial of wrongdoing, Congressman Doolittle penned this oped http://www.sacbee.com/... which ran initially in small media in his district. When the piece was first published earlier this week, many Democratic Party activists blasted it, ridiculed it, laughed at it, and dismissed it as a meager attempt by a corrupt Republican to hold on to his job - and possibly avoid jail.
Yet as I read Doolittle's account of the April 27, 2007 raid, I can't help but think - what if there is something more here than meets the eye?
You see, John Doolittle, in his published op-ed, is accusing the Bush Justice Department of deliberately orchestrating an unnecessary and illegal raid on his premises to help support the contention of Attorney General Gonzales that his investigation into corruption on the part of Republicans is being carried out fairly.
Doolittle's oped means the Justice Department - in order to get a search warrant request approved by a judge - lied to the court to secure such a warrant. Such a deceptive lie before the bench puts several US attorneys at the DOJ at risk of a criminal conviction for perjury. Lying to get a search warrant approved is also grounds for disbarment.
Therefore, if John Doolittle is telling the truth, and the Bush Justice Department lied in order to get a search warrant approved as part of a grand scheme on their part to obstruct Congressional investigators looking into whether Bush's DOJ intentionally stalled criminal inquires into activities surrounding Conressional Republican malfeasance, then we have a very serious criminal issue here. Basically, Republican John Doolittle is accusing the Bush DOJ in general - and Attorney General Albert Gonzales specifically -of perjury, obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, and lying to Congress.
But I want Dkos readers to take a look at John Doolittle's op-ed, which was geared toward a small newspaper in his district. Please read it with an open mind.
How does it read to you? I'll tell you how it reads to me. It reads like a first-person narrative, or a "statement of fact" designed more to keep his political career alive, rather than an honest attempt to avoid a criminal conviction by blasting aggressive prosecutors who have crossed the line and are picking on an innocent man.
In fact, John Doolittle goes into painstaking description as to what federal agents took and what they did not take from their search. He compares himself to an obscure acquitted public servant from 25 years ago, and is appearing to set the groundwork for what he believes will ultimately become of the investigation - no charges filed. Of course, to stay in Congress, he will still have to win the hearts of a skeptical electorate. That op-ed is step one in that process.
But, if John Doolittle is telling the truth, why didn't the Bush DOJ bring charges against other Republicans under investigation, such as Rick Renzi, Jerry Lewis, or Gary Miller?
Well, I think there are reasons for that. Yes, I believe the Doolittle and Renzi raids were timed to coincide with Gonzales' testimony. Gonzales referred to the search warrant excecutions as part of his "We are aggressively going after Republicans" stance during his appearance before Congress.
Of the GOP Four - Lewis, Miller, Renzi, Doolitle - Renzi and Doolittle's cases appears to be the most open-and-shut. First, Jerry Lewis' issue is very complex, involving possible federally-funded earmarks for favors, while Miller is a multi-millionaire and his problem concerns purchases of million-dollar land parcels.
Further complicating the path to a criminal conviction, Miller's personal net worth of millions make it possible for him to spend upwards of $10 million on an outstanding legal defense team, while Lewis is seen as an old man who has the respect of his colleagues, including many Democrats. Criminal convictions against these two seem difficult, if not impossible. (Not on matter of law, but on jury perception and the ability of the defendant to fight back. In Lewis' case, who wants to sentence a 74-year-old grey-haired man to a jail term?).
Doolittle - love him or hate him - is a middle-aged man of modest means. Unlike Miller, there is no way Doolittle could afford a "Dream Team" of attorneys. In other words, to quote a technical legal term - he's fucked.
Therefore, I think a deal was cut. A "raid" on Doolittle's premises before Gonzales' testimony. The "raid" will ultimately prove futile, as the Bush DOJ will refuse to bring charges, saying that there is "no evidence of a crime." Doolittle is left with having to work extra hard to win re-election, but given the nature of his district, he should still be able to do it. Yes, I know, Charlie Brown remains an attractive candidate, albeit in an uphill district.
Doolittle's op-ed is simply part of the strategy to win re-election in 2008 and rehabilitate his public image. When no charges are filed, Doolittle can point to this oped and say "See, I told you so."
And Renzi? His reward is to stay out of jail, providing he leaves Congress at the end of this term. As a three-term member, he just didn't have the clout that Doolittle had (at one point, Doolittle was the fourth-ranking Republican in the House). Plus, Renzi's seat is more vulnerable than that of Doolittle.
John Doolittle showed immense loyalty to President Bush by agreeing to a bogus "raid." The DOJ will likely reward that loyalty with no charges filed, leaving Doolittle to serve his GOP-leaning district long beyond the time Bush and Gonzales depart Washington.
Basically, I think the Doolittle "raid" is a charade designed to cover up a cover-up as part of the Bush Administration's efforts to stonewall Congressional investigators looking into the real reasons of the firings of US attorneys.
I think John Doolittle is right; the search is much ado about nothing. But he's not telling us the whole story, and probably never will.