by user MisterApologist
 I've searched all 3000 Justice Department documents using these great options from Daily Kos ( I recommend the single file that is 25 megabytes and has search features) and have gathered everything pertinent to ex-US Attorney Daniel Bogden. I will post all of the new information and try to highlight the important sections. Here is some of yesterday's revelations from the first batch of files and my subsequent analysis.
 Subject: RE: Condensed Reason for Resignation for Daniel Bogden- Debbie, I checked with Jean about changing the reason to "Term expired effective 10-28-05. Employee was in a holdover status." Jean reminded me, we can't change the employee's reason for resignation. We can only condense it. Jean suggested a more condensed version, "Requested to step down." Let me know if this is OK. Thanks, Kit
 Email from Brian Rodarkasse- Our new Wall Street Journal beat reporter will publish a story tomorrow about the recent resignations of U.S. Attorneys. Through his reporting, he believes at least six U.S. Attys were forced to resign induding .USAs Ryan, Cummins, Lam, Bogden, Igelsias and Charlton_ I didn't confirm, deny or otherwise comment beyond cautioning him that he better be careful his sources are accurate. He did speak with at least Cummins and Igelsias, and possibly others. When he first contacted me about this story he raised questions about political motivations and the correlation to the recent legislative changes on the AG's appointment authority. However, with all of the background information we provided on the appointment authority and pointing him towards our recent nominations, I don't think it will be as politically focused. More likely, he will write that the Department is pushing out USAs because they are underperforming or not embracing the Department's priorities. The story will be very critical of how the Bud Cummins situation was handled. He thinks despite the political pedigree; that Griffin is very qualified, but just the way in which it was handled with Cummins and Pryor will make it nearly impossible for him to be nominated or confirmed. The good news on this front is he finds Feinstein and Pryor's criticism that we don't intend to nominate USAs suspect and unwarranted .
Mike: I believe McKay is way out of line here. This document was drafted under the guise of an info sharing working for the AGAC - and it was directed to the DAG. Internal deliberations and policy recommendations should not be shared outside of the Department unless so authorized by the DAG. I don't know what mcKay"s motives are, but this is embarrassing and outrageous. . MAC  We Should consider pushing out....
!VERY IMPORTANT SECTION!: If we can't resolve it soon, the difficulty of getting USA cooperation in key districts is going lead to a showdown with the FBI . Once the FBI realized that CDCA straight-armed us on our Orange County case (which has been hanging for 4-5 months) and once the WFO SAC and I sat in a meeting with Paul Charlton ih Phoenix arid heard him thumb his nose at us, the Bureau knew this obscenity initiative could be heading for disaster. That put them in defensive mode. They are now doing only a very minimal amount of spade work on a case before sending me a "60-day letter" giving me 60 days to secure USA cooperation to prosecute or the case will be closed. These 60-day letters are now piling up. I have copied below an email I sent to Matt Lewis earlier today, along with an email exchange between the Las Vegas U.S. Attorney and me, to give you more insight into what I am talking about. Matt, This troubling email exchange is one of the things I would like to urgently discuss with you. It's of course ridiculous in a way to take an entourage of people out to LV in a losing cause. The only justification is to "make a record' for the purpose of engaging people in the Department at a higher level to turn this around (in my opinion it will take a call from the AG himself). This ought to be done now. It would obviate the need for this trip altogether. For the FBI people to go out to LV and sit and listen to the lame excuses of a defiant U.S. Attorney is only going to move this whole enterprise closer to catastrophe. The Bureau is positioning itself so that it can point the finger at DOJ and say, "See, we investigated this case and DOJ couldn't find anyone to prosecute it." It just don't want to be set up like that. !!!EMAIL FROM DANIEL BOGDEN : That is fine. I still am a bit surprised, however, at the extreme number of personnel traveling to Las Vegas for such a case presentation. That is highly unusual . I just want to again reiterate my position, though, as to our severe manning and personnel shortages in the USAO, District of Nevada. During our telephone conversation, you made a comment about this being some type of 50/50 split on manning and personnel, if out-district were to accept such a case for prosecution. I told you then that such an arrangement is highly unlikely as we simply do not have available manning or personnel for such a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!(THIS SECTION HAS BEEN EDITED IN THE COPY GIVEN BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) n. Since our teleshone conversation; our personnel situation has become more FBI SAC Steve Martinez designates from his FBI, Las Vegas office, out and review your case presentation but we have very limited to no capacity to undertake such a prosecutive matter With what we currently have going on in our office and district. Dan, I appreciate the opportunity to meet with you at 1 p.m. on Wednesday, September 6, 2006 in your office to discuss a case we wish to present to you. As of now, I will be accompanied by Matthew Buzzelli, a Trial Attorney on the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force, Diego Rodriguez, acting SAC of the Washington, D.C. Field Office of the FBI, and Angela McGravy, an FBI special agent assigned to the FBI's Adult Obscenity Squad, which is attached to the Washington, D.C. Field Office. I believe we will also be Joined by a representative from the Las Vegas Field Office. We look forward to seeing you on the 6th. Thank you. Brent Our whole approach to obscenity enforcement could be greatly improved, if the Task Force and the FBI squad were co-located. Some of the impediments that have hindered the effectiveness of the squad could be overcome, if we were in closer proximity. You are considering Moving the Task Force anyway, and I think the success of the Task Force may hinge on turning it into a real task force by putting us together with the people we ought to be working with on a daily basis. Subject: RE: DRAFT Elston re NV and AZ -- do you know the facts from CRIM's obscenity task force regarding the details of what happened in those cases? .- - Original Message - From: Moschella, William To: Goodling, Monica , Subject: Re: DRAFT What does it mean that they did not support the obscenity prosecution in their district? Were theCases brought anyway without their support?
Senator Ensign will recommend potential candidates. Daniel Bogden : 9 years as federal prosecutor/manager plus 5 years of private sector litigation and 8 rears in the Marine Corps Judge Advocate • Similarly, Nevada is what we consider to be a very important district that was underserved. • Given the large tourist population that visits each year, it's well-known that Las Vegas could present a target for terrorism. It has also struggled with violent crime, drugs, and organized crime. This is an office where we have the right to expect excellence and aggressive prosecution in a number of priority areas. • Despite the national focus the Attorney General requested for offices to place on the federal creme of obscenity, which coarsens society, the USA failed to support the Department's prosecution of a case that was developed within his district
From yesterday's US NewsWire : Fact or Fiction
> FICTION: The Bush Administration told Sen. John Ensign ( news, bio, voting record) (R-NV) that Daniel Bogden was fired because he did not prosecute enough "adult obscenity" cases. " One is that I was trying to get the specifics of why he was let go. And to be honest with you, this is what I was told. I was told that there were two areas that they didn't feel that Dan was being aggressive enough. One was on obscenity cases -- adult obscenity cases." Press Conference by Senator John Ensign (R-NV.), 3/13/07) > > FACT: Daniel Bogden moved forward on adult obscenity cases - even when the Justice Department gave him little to work with. "A former senior law enforcement official knowledgeable about the work of the Nevada U.S. attorney's office said he was shocked to see the criticism of Bogden ... The case in question, involving adult obscenity on the Internet, was 'woefully deficient' of details according to the official, who confirmed that Ward had gone to Nevada in early September 2006 to present it. 'All they had was a Web site,' he said. 'They didn't have a target fully identified, they had no assets -- they didn't even know where the guy was managing his server.' Nevertheless ... Bogden's office agreed to put together a proposal for pursuing the case, outlining the additional work and resources needed to build it, the official said. The implication that Bogden was refusing to take on a 'good case' in that instance, the official said, 'is totally absurd.' " (Salon.com, 3/19/07) > > FACT: Senator Ensign may have been "intentionally mislead." "I said it before: I was either intentionally misled or somebody was misinformed and unaware of the complete process." (Press Conference by Senator John Ensign (R-NV.), 3/13/07) > > FACT: Karl Rove served as a conduit to for political complaints about the U.S.Attorneys. "The White House acknowledged on Sunday that presidential adviser Karl Rove served as a conduit for complaints to the Justice Department about federal prosecutors who were later fired for what critics charge were partisan political reasons." (McClatchy, 3/11/07)
- I will have an update to this Wednesday evening*****