03.08.2013 Views

June 10, 2010 letter - James P. Scanlan, Attorney at Law

June 10, 2010 letter - James P. Scanlan, Attorney at Law

June 10, 2010 letter - James P. Scanlan, Attorney at Law

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Jay Macklin, Esq.<br />

<strong>June</strong> <strong>10</strong>, 20<strong>10</strong><br />

Page 4<br />

the EOUSA may have in the m<strong>at</strong>ter could not be effectively discharged without careful review of<br />

the issues raised in my <strong>letter</strong> of November 2, 2009 and the m<strong>at</strong>erials it references. It would also<br />

seem th<strong>at</strong>, whether or not in the normal course of a confirm<strong>at</strong>ion process the formal role of<br />

EOUSA in such m<strong>at</strong>ter would be a continuing one, its responsibility to bring to the <strong>at</strong>tention of<br />

the President any knowledge it has th<strong>at</strong> calls into question the suitability of a nominee to hold a<br />

United St<strong>at</strong>es <strong>Attorney</strong> position is indeed continuing.<br />

As the confirm<strong>at</strong>ion process moves forward, I will be encouraging members of the Judiciary<br />

Committee and other entities to review the conduct of Mr. O’Neill in the Dean case – including<br />

with regard to the m<strong>at</strong>ter addressed in Section B.1 of the main Prosecutorial Misconduct page,<br />

which was also addressed <strong>at</strong> length in the November 2, 2009 <strong>letter</strong> to <strong>Attorney</strong> General Holder<br />

and a lengthy August 2008 post on powerlineblog.com, as well as with regard to varied other<br />

m<strong>at</strong>ters addressed in the profile on Mr. O’Neill – encouraging those entities as well to seek the<br />

Department of Justice’s appraisal of such m<strong>at</strong>ters. In the event inquiries are made of the<br />

Department concerning the merits of such alleg<strong>at</strong>ions, the Department ought to be in the position<br />

to say whether the alleg<strong>at</strong>ions have merit and, if they do have merit, whether they bear on the<br />

suitability of Mr. O’Neill to serve as a United St<strong>at</strong>es <strong>Attorney</strong>. A response th<strong>at</strong> the Department<br />

does not have an opinion because it has declined to investig<strong>at</strong>e the alleg<strong>at</strong>ions – whether because<br />

they could have been raised in litig<strong>at</strong>ion or for any other reason – would not seem a s<strong>at</strong>isfactory<br />

one.<br />

In any case, while the discussion above ought to provide reason enough for your office to<br />

<strong>at</strong>tempt to determine the merits of my alleg<strong>at</strong>ions concerning Mr. O’Neill’s conduct in the Dean<br />

case, it may be sensible to elicit from <strong>Attorney</strong> General Holder his reasons for referring my <strong>letter</strong><br />

to your office.<br />

Sincerely,<br />

/s/ <strong>James</strong> P. <strong>Scanlan</strong><br />

<strong>James</strong> P. <strong>Scanlan</strong><br />

cc: The Honorable Eric Holder<br />

<strong>Attorney</strong> General<br />

.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!