An Investigation into the Removal of Nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006, U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility, Sept. 2008. (PDF, 392 pp., 3.6 Megs).

Site http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/new.htm says "HTML coming soon."

From the conclusion:

The most serious allegations that arose were that the U.S. Attorneys were removed based on improper political factors, including to affect the way they handled certain voter fraud or public corruption investigations and prosecutions. Our investigation found significant evidence that political partisan considerations were an important factor in the removal of several of the U.S. Attorneys. The most troubling example was David Iglesias, the U.S. Attorney in New Mexico. We concluded that complaints from New Mexico Republican politicians and party activists about Iglesias’s handling of voter fraud and public corruption cases caused his removal, and that the Department removed Iglesias without any inquiry into his handling of the cases.

However, we were unable to fully develop the facts regarding the removal of Iglesias and several other U.S. Attorneys because of the refusal by certain key witnesses to be interviewed by us, as well as by the White House’s decision not to provide internal White House documents to us. Therefore, we recommend that counsel specially appointed by the Attorney General work with us to conduct further investigation and ultimately to determine whether the totality of the evidence demonstrates that any criminal offense was committed.

In addition to the DOJ IG report that was posted here, another report from the DOJ Inspector General was also placed online last week.

+ A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Use of Section 215 Order for Business Records (Unclassified), March 2007 (PDF; 10 MB)

We conducted this review mindful of the controversy concerning the possible chilling effect on the exercise of First Amendment rights posed by the FBI’s ability to use Section 215 authorities, particularly the potential use of Section 215 orders to obtain records held by libraries. Our review found that the FBI did not in fact obtain Section 215 orders for any library records from 2003 through 2005, in part because the few applications for such orders did not survive the review process within NSLB (National Security Law Branch) and OIPR (Office of Intelligence Policy and Review).

Thanks, as always to my colleague Shirl Kennedy at DocuTicker.com for posting this report.