"Michael Elston informed me that I must vacate my position by March 1.  Therefore, I plan to announce my resignation on the afternoon of February 14 or the morning of February 15.  I need all the time, salary and benefits available so my resignation will be effective on February 28."

"FYI: Everyone who knows about my required resignation (primarily our USA colleagues and people who are providing references), Is astonished that I am being asked to leave. Now that it has been widely reported that departing USAs have either failed to meet performance expectations or that they acted independently rather than follow DOJ/EOUSA directives, the situation is so much worse.  You know that I am in neither category.  This makes me so sad. Why have I been asked to resign?  The real reason, especially if true, would be a lot easier to live with."

Part 6/ Page 21

by jeninRI on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 10:12:37 PM EST

Part 4 / Page 10

by jeninRI on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 10:17:31 PM EST

Michael Elston telephone on Friday afternoon with the welcome news that February 23 should be the date for announcing my resignation followed by a departure date of March 9.  I appreciate the consideration.

Here is what I should have mentioned.  I am the NAIS chair. Our first field-based meeting in over a year is scheduled on March 13 and 14 in North Carolina. Gretchen Shappert and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians are hosting the meeting and a tribal summit which will include 26 federally recognized tribes in the region. Secretary of the Interior Kempthorn is expected to attend.  The NAIS staff detailee, who is from WDMI, was terminated despite and outstanding evaluation because EOUSA would not renew her detail. The replacement has not been announced nor will he be able to assist. It makes good sense for me to prepare, (which I have been doing), and chair the meeting.  This is particularly true because 4 NAIS members are part of "the group" (Charlton, Bogden, McKay, Iglesias).  It is better for me to handle this situation than in interim chair.

My resignation announcement continues to be on February 23; the departure date would be March 16. I trust that this minor adjustment for good cause is acceptable to you.

Rayne - I haven't been following the NAIS thread as closely as you have.  Any sense of who is the WDMI staffer here?

by jeninRI on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 10:30:05 PM EST

Paul: I respectfully request that you reconsider the rationale of poor performance as the basis for my dismissal. It is in our mutual interest to retract this erroneous explanation while there is still time. Please simply state that a presidentially appointed position is not an entitlement.  No other explanation is needed.

As you know, I have assiduously avoided public comment by pursuing an informal version of the "witness protection program" in order to elude reporters! However, the legal community in Grand Rapids and organizations throughout Michigan are outraged that I am being labeled "a poor performer". Politics may not be a pleasant reason but the truth is compelling. Know that I am considered a personification of ethics and productivity. And as you surely realize, the unresolved Phil Green situation has definitely complicated the perception of DOJ in WDMI.

The notoriety of being one of the "USA-8" coupled with my age being constantly cited in the press is proving to be a formidable obstacle to securing employment. The best resolution with regard to both timing and outcome is the assistant director position at the NAC.  I have already made it clear to the OLE Director that you do not consider former United States Attorney status a barrier to continued DOJ service. I ask that you endorse or otherwise encourage my selection for reasons discussed in previous emails. Given the quality and quantity of my contribution during the past 5+ years, I am confident that you are willing to provide affirmative assistance.

Part 9 / Page 26

by jeninRI on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 10:58:46 PM EST

Today's Congressional events make clear that I am, indeed, among the "USA-8".
Shortly after his opening statement, but before citing the perceived deficiencies of my former colleagues, Will Moschella stated that the two United States Attorneys not present were dismissed because of management problems.  Apparently Kevin Ryan (whom I do not know) and I share the same reason for termination.

Michael Elston told me on more than one occasion, that the rationale for dismissal was on a continuum of sorts and that I was on the de minimus end after Dan Bogden. It is abundantly clear that this regrettable situation could have been better managed if the reasons for the dismissals were initially communicated to the affected United States Attorneys.

So, I now need to know what is the management problem to which Mr. Moschella referred?

Part 10 / Page 25

by jeninRI on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 11:08:52 PM EST

Senator Jon Kyl will be called about Charlton;
John Ensign will be called about Bogden;
Pete Domenici will be called about Iglesias.

There are blank fields where names have been redacted.  But there are only a total of 7 bullets, not eight.

So who was called about Chiara's replacement?  Anybody?  Was she a ringer?

by RayneToday on Mon Mar 19, 2007 at 11:21:12 PM EST

[On November 3, Michael Elston] further informaed me that I should expect contact from the White House requesting my resignation as USA shortly after the November 7 elections. He could offer no explanation other than that I erroneously assumed that good service guaranteed longevity because other USAs have been asked for their resignation without cause.  In my case the service has [been] exemplary in a difficult district in addition to being an active contributor since appointment on 3 of the A.G.'s subcommittees.
While I live in hope that this dire prediction is untrue, I am contacting you because I need assistance to remain in federal service with a comparable compensation or, quite frankly, I will lose everything that I have been working toward for the past five years. My chronology will not allow me to recoup from such an unanticipated financial catastrophe. I trust that I can count on you to intervene or provide an alternative

From: Elston, Michael (ODAG)
Sent: Friday. February 09, 2007 5:28 PM
To: Goodling, Monica
Subject: Fw: Solution.

This idea may help us avoid linking this to the others. What do you think?

----- Original Message-----
From: McNulty, Paul J
To: Elston, Michael (ODAG)
Sent: Fri Feb 09 17:25:15 2007
Subject: FW: Solution

Could we make this happen? Hire her into an EOUSA slot and then send her down to the NAC?

From: Chiara, Margaret M. (USAMIW) [mailto:MM.Chiara@usdoj.govl
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 1:55 PM
To: McNulty, Paul J
Subject : Solution

Paul: You may recall from earlier communication with me that I have owned a home in South Carolina for several years.
The announcement (below) is for a detail at the NAC for which I am completely qualified and which I would enjoy doing. Obviously, I am not currently eligible for a detail position. Will you please intervene to make the position available for me? It would provide a timely and satisfactory solution to my current job search. Thank you.
Margaret

Experienced Prosecutor Needed to Serve as an Assistant Director, Office of Legal Education, EOUSA, Columbia, South Carolina

Part 1-6, page 42

I can tell if they want to avoid linking her to the others to help her or save themselves more grief?

by standingup on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 10:08:58 AM EST

I posted the following information on MichiganLiberal.com, and Rayne asked me to post it here as well.

Below are some of the postings from this TPMmuckraker.com review of documents (http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002809.php). I didn't copy in every post from the thread, nor all of the people's names who posted the details. I believed it was best to focus on the actual emails with little editorializing.

Note that Chiara's November 7 memo says she's been informed that she's being let go so that a Republican congressperson losing their seat will fill her job.

This is stunning, IMO. Someone needs to get to the bottom of this. I'd like to suggest that those who have legal knowledge and/or contacts in the western Michigan area research anything else they can find out about Chiara's dismissal. Because Chiara says people are questioning why she's leaving, I'm guessing there may be news stories and/or information in the legal community about Chiara's surprising dismissal, the rumored MSU job, and other related materials.
______
3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-6 page 20.

From: Chiara, Margaret M. (USAMIW)[MM.Chiara@usdoj.gov]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 3:41 'PM
To: McNulty, Paul J .
Cc: Elston, Michael (ODAG)
Subject: WDMI

Paul: February 1 seems to be the right date to provide a status report. I continue to vigorously pursue employment. In addition to applying to numerous public agencies and organizations, I am now working with a "headhunter". Who knew this could be so difficult?
Michael Elston informed me that I must vacate my position by March 1. Therefore, I plan to announce my resignation on the afternoon of February 14 or the morning of February 15. I need all the time, salary and benefits available so my resignation will be effective on February 28. The first question within WDMI will be who is the nominee? When will I be able to answer that question?
FYI: Everyone who knows about my required resignation, (primarily our USA colleagues and people who are providing references ), is astonished that I am being asked to leave. Now that if has been widely reported that departing USAs have either failed to meet performance expectations or that they acted independently rather than follow DOJ/EOUSA directives, the situation is so much worse. You know that I am in neither catagory. This makes me so sad. Why have I been asked to resign? The real reason, epecially if true, would be a lot easier to live with. Margaret
___
3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-8 page 21.

From: Scolinos, Tasia
Sent: Thursday, February 22. 2007 5:13 PM
To: Elston Michael (ODAG); Goodling, Monica; Sampson, Kyle
Cc: Roehrkasse, Brian
Subject: FW: Margaret Chiara Press Release
Attachments:' 2007 MMC press release.wpd

FYI - Michigan is going to push this out tomorrow. The first question will be whether she was asked to leave. The first assistant said he did not know what Margaret planned to say in response to that. Has anyone talked to her this week to get a feel for where she is at with this? She is also faxing a copy of her resignation letter to the AG and the WH -the first assistant did not know what it said. Has she discussed it with any of you? I believe this will generate another round `of rough stories as expected- her press release paints a pretty dam good record and emphasizes her many "firsts" as a woman which the media will no doubt play up. I am planning to decline comment out of here with respect to whether she was as to leave.
______
3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-10 page 9.
From: Chiara, Margaret M (USAMIW)
Sent: Tuesday, November 07. 2006 8:00 AM
To: McNulty, Paul J
Subject: Re: USA/WDMI

Paul: As soon as the "election dust settles", I ask that you tell me why my resignation may be requested. Since you have not taken exception to the eventually, I now assume that it is likely. I need to know the truth to live in peace with the aftermath. (Of course, we do need to retain control of the Senate to facilitate confirmations.) Perhaps you are not aware that Michael Elston informed me, per Monica Goodling, that a congress person, who is expected to lose in today's election, will be offered the leadership of the VAW office. I am already actively but discretely pursuing self-help options. However, I will need assistance to retain federal gov't financial security, as stated in my previous e -mail. Know that I appreciate your response and offer to assist. Margaret

Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

--Original Message--
From: McNulty, Paul J
To: Chiara, Margaret M. (USAMIWj
Sent: Tue Nov 07 07:22:51 2006
Subject: Re: USA/WOMI

Margaret, I received your message and I appreciate your perspective. I know of your interest in the VAWA job and will let you know if any other opportunities come up. Paul

Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

--Original Message--
From: Chiara, Margaret M. (USAMIW)
To: McNulty, Paul J
Sent: Sun Nov 05 15:13:03 2006
Subject: USA/WOMI

Paul: On November 3, Michael Elston conveyed professional shocking news. I had previously consulted him about the feasibility of a brief leave of absence to serve as the interim dean of the Michigan State University College of Law. (Note: MSU is interested in me only if I am the USA for WOMI.) Mr. Elston informed me that such a leave is only an option when the alternate service is within the federal government. He further informed me that I should expect contact from the White House requesting my resignation as USA shortly after the November 7 elections. He could offer no explanation other than that I erroneously assumed that good service guaranteed longevity because other USAs have been asked for their resignation without cause. In my case the service has exemplary in a difficult district in addition to being an active contributor since appointment on 3 of the A.G.'s subcommittees. While I live in hope that this dire prediction is untrue, I am contacting you because I need assistance to remain in federal service with a comparable compensation or, quite frankly, I will lose everything that I have been working toward for the past five years. My chronology will not allow me to recoup from such an unanticipated financial catastrophe. I trust that I can count on you to intervene or provide an alternative. Margaret
_______
Page 25 contains a confrontational email dated March 6, 2007 from Margaret Chiara to Paul McNulty and Michael Elson immediately after she found out that she was one of the 8 prosecutors (not sure if this is related to Moschella's testimony or not):

-- snip snip --

From: Chiara, Margaret M. (USAMIW)
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007
To: McNulty, Paul J
Cc: Elston, Michael (ODAG)
Subject: WDMI

Importance: High

Today's Congressional events make clear that I am, indeed, among the "USA - 8".
Shortly after his opening statement, but before citing the perceived deficiencies of my former colleagues, Will Moschella stated that the two United States Attorneys not present were dismissed because of management problems. Apparently Kevin Ryan (whom I do not know) and I share the same reason for termination.

Michael Elston told me on more than one occasion, that the rationale for dismissal was on a continuum of sorts and that I am on the de minimus end after Dan Bogden. It is abundantly clear that this regrettable situation could have been better managed if the reasons for the dismissals were initially communicated to the affected United States Attorneys.

So, I now need to know what is the management problem to which Mr. Moschella referred?

Margaret

--snip snip--

Pages 26 on through the end of this document are all testimony from a full-committee hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on "Preserving Prosecutorial Independence: Is the Department of Justice Politicizing the Hiring and Firing of U.S. Attorneys?" chaired by Charles Schumer (D-NY). Testimony from deputy attorney general Paul J. McNulty starts on page 37 and continues through the end. I assume this was a public hearing so I didn't read it more carefully than this.
______
In 2-1, p.43, a 1/5/07 e-mail exchange between Sampson, Goodling, Elston and McNulty shows that Chiara, Bodgen and Lam asked for extensions on their sudden firings. Sampson writes, "And we granted 1-month extensions for Dan and Margaret, but not Carol -- right?"
________
2-1 Chiara / McNulty emails, followed by emails discussing Chiara

p. 9 (Nov 7, election day)

Chiara: "I need to know the truth to live in peace with the aftermath."

2-2,

p. 33 (Feb 9)
Chiara sends job posting to McNulty. McNulty to Elston: "Could we make this happen? Hire her into an EOUSA spot and send her down to the NAC?"

p. 38 (Feb 13)
Chiara sends another job posting to McNulty: "Your intervention would be needed"

[Feb 12, Levin and Stabenow send a letter to Gonzales asking if any Michigan US Attorneys are being resigned. Chiara's fate is still a secret]

p. 42 (Feb 21)
Chiara emails McNulty with details of resignation announcement, set for 2/23 and asks for clarification on departure date

[what happened between Feb 12 and Feb 21? Did McNulty pull strings to get Chiara a job, and her silence?]

2-3,

p. 1 (Mar 4)
Chiara emails McNulty asking him to 'reconsider the rationale of poor performance'... 'Politics may not be a pleasant reason but the truth is compelling. And as you surely realize, the unresolved Phil Green situation has definitely complicated the perception of DOJ in WDMI.'

p. 2
McNulty replies, 'you know well how we have worked with you to help you make as smooth a transition as possible to your next opportunity'. Says 'performance' is truthful.

p. 19 (Mar 6)
Chiara to McNulty, complaining about Moschella's reference to 'management problems' in his statement to the House subcommittee.

by LandOfTheFree on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 12:58:43 PM EST

It's an interesting web of information. At first, shock and confusion that she's leaving. Then, some whispers about her being a part of a larger campaign to get rid of several US Attorneys. Finally, DOJ starts flinging some mud at her in defense of their actions.

It's clear from the memos released in last night's doc dump that Chiara was trying to play as nice as possible so she could get another job. According to her emails, she was ducking press questions, and simply wanted the DOJ to at least remove questions about her performance, and preferably also either delay her "resignation" until she gained other employment.  

I did do a quick search for local and national news about her dismissal - note that she spoke out publically to reporters about it a few days ago to the AP.

Let's go chronologically from older to newest articles.

Feb. 23 Grand Rapids Press article (leak that she's announcing resignation): http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ssf?/base/news-34/117224790297710.xml&coll=6

Interesting blurbs from that article:

The Justice Department has recently fired seven U.S. attorneys across the country. Chiara is the latest victim in the shake-up, U.S. District Judge Robert Holmes Bell said this morning.

"I was shocked to learn that her resignation had been requested," Bell said. "She's clearly part of a larger pattern."

In previous Justice Department firings, officials cited poor performance among the U.S. attorneys. However, most had positive job reviews but ran into political trouble over such issues as the death penalty and immigration, according to a Washington Post report.

Chiara opposes capital punishment, though she has vowed to uphold the federal laws that require it. In 2003, Attorney General John Ashcroft rejected a plea deal from her office that would have avoided the death penalty in a drug-related Cadillac-area murder.
(snip)
Among the hallmark cases Chiara has been in charge of were the potential death penalty case against Robert Ostrander for a Cadillac-area drug slaying, the allegations involving principals from the CyberNET high-tech firm that collapsed in a $100 million scam. On Thursday, she announced a 23-count indictment against a company accused of employing illegal immigrants.

I couldn't help but wonder if she went after a company hiring illegal immigrants in a last-ditch attempt to keep her job. DOJ can't say she's been weak on immigration, can they?

Feb. 24 2007 AP article (when she announced her pending resignation, gives no details or comments): http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9924813/

March 14 2007 AP Article: http://www.wwmt.com/onset?id=34886&template=article.html

This is when she finally speaks out ever-so-carefully about her dismissal.

GRAND RAPIDS (AP) - The top federal prosecutor in western Michigan says she doesn't know why she's being replaced.

Margaret Chiara says she did a good job as US attorney.

She also denies giving preferential treatment to a friend who received her office's biggest cash bonuses.

Newly released documents show Chiara was among the first of eight US attorneys to be targeted for dismissal by the Justice Department.

March 14 2007 Kalamazoo Gazette article: http://www.mlive.com/news/kzgazette/index.ssf?/base/news-22/1173885742303320.xml&coll=7

This is the one where the nastiness gets spelled out:

A high-ranking Justice Department official, in a March 2005 e-mail to an adviser to President Bush, identified Margaret Chiara as a ``weak'' federal prosecutor, the documents say.

Several months before that, assistant prosecutors in Chiara's Grand Rapids office complained to federal evaluators that she played favorites, especially with a longtime friend she hired, according to current and former assistants in her office. However, several of the assistants came to Chiara's defense during interviews with The Grand Rapids Press, saying jealousy and fragile egos led to bad feelings among some prosecutors.

Finally, a summary from the Detroit Free Press, published today: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070320/NEWS06/70320024

I did a bit of scouring the web to see if I could find any other relevant/new info on her resignation - nothing new to report. I did find very few references to some actions she's taken, such as doing a presentation in western MI on the USA Patriot Act (http://www.mediamouse.org/features/091903us_at.php), and also on trying to "build bridges" between the DOJ and Arab Americans.

It seems she's been keeping her nose clean and her head low. Her only public statements since the imminent firing and now was that she didn't understand why she was dismissed.

by LandOfTheFree on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 08:49:58 PM EST

As noted in comments by Paul Kiel at TPMmuckraker:

This isn't a comment about what has been found in the document dump of last night, but about what HASN'T been found. (Note: my question/comment is inspired by this 3/16 interview of [U.S. Attorney] Bud Cummins).

If the USA's had been forced to resign for performance related reasons, wouldn't you expect to see a huge paper trail of the performance review process itself? Take the case of [U.S. Attorney for Western Michigan Margaret] Chiara. If the problem was office management/morale, I would expect the following in the record:

1. Some document sent to the someone in the AG's office, saying, "Hey, I've been hearing there are some morale/managerial problems in Chiara's office.";

2. A formal letter to Chiara saying, "We would like to review your management of the office. We'll be sending officials out to your district to discuss."

3. A report to the DAG saying, "We went out to her office and, in fact, we believe there are managerial problems. Chiara offered to takes steps A, B & C to correct. Will review in 6 months.";

4. Then, 6 months later, there would be another report saying, "It's been six months since the last review. Nothing's changed. It may be time to consider removing her.";

5. A follow-up from the DAG saying, "Nope, her time is up. We'll recommend her removal and replacement to the AG.";

6. Then a series of letters/emails between offices about "Should we remove her?" and "Yes, we should remove her. Set it up." and "Here's how and why we're removing her.";

7. Finally, a series of documents setting up her formal removal, communicating that to the AG and the WH.

But, there's none of that. You'd think if such documents existed, they'd be definitive and the first set of docs the Justice Department would release. If the attorneys in the AG's office are anything like the private attorneys I know, they wouldn't do anything as significant as forcing the resignation of any single USA, without first creating a paper trail a mile long. Should be 1000 pages of docs for each USA removal, right?

Everybody seems to be looking for a smoking gun, but the real story is that the evidence we've been given is of a gun that's never been fired.

Exactly.  Another dog that didn't bark.

We see them beginning to do the homework AFTER the USA's have already been earmarked and called; with  a couple of minor exceptions, like the question about "woodshedding" Lam, there is a marked lack of case building that would be typical in most organizations that seek to remove a problem employee.  The pattern described by the commenter JD above is exactly what I would have had to do as an employer at any small to large enterprise organization before I could fire somebody.

They didn't do this upfront, only started to put notes together after 07-DEC rationalizing why these USA's were exited.

by RayneToday on Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 10:31:22 AM EST

Delaney has served as the district's criminal chief since January 2006 and has been an assistant attorney for the district since 1989. Before joining the prosecutor's office, he was a special agent with the FBI from 1983-89."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MI_CHIARA_DISMISSED_MIOL-?SITE=MIDTF&SECTION=HOME&TEM PLATE=DEFAULT

What's up with having 3 replacements?  Stoddard, DeLaney and Gross.  

by Silver Owl on Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:10:37 PM EST