U.S. attorney criticized for actions
Ft.Worth Star Telegram
WASHINGTON — Conservative lawmakers said Tuesday that a U.S. attorney in Texas is engaged in an “alarming pattern” of defending the rights of illegal immigrants over those of U.S. law enforcement officers.
The accusations came during a House hearing that examined the case of Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio Ramos, two former Border Patrol agents serving long sentences for shooting a Mexican drug smuggler and trying to cover it up.
The U.S. attorney in question, Johnny Sutton of the Western District of Texas, declined to appear before the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee.
He has previously defended the prosecution of the agents.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., who has championed the agents’ cause, suggested that Sutton was afraid to testify under oath.
He also likened Sutton to Michael Nifong, the district attorney in North Carolina who was disbarred for his prosecution of three Duke University athletes on rape charges.
“We cannot let this nightmare go on,” Rohrabacher said of the agents’ incarceration.
The Department of Justice said earlier in the week that Sutton was not needed at the hearing because it was focused on communication with the Mexican government and Sutton already gave written confirmation to the committee that his office had no contact with Mexican officials.
Richard Skinner, the Department of Homeland Security inspector general, also declined to appear.
Compean and Ramos are serving 12 and 11 years in prison, respectively, for shooting and wounding Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, who had entered the United States illegally in a van with more than 700 pounds of marijuana.
The case has become a cause celebre among conservatives and groups that advocate tougher border controls. Supporters say the agents were wrongly convicted for protecting the United States against a criminal intruder. Many are incensed that Davila was offered immunity to testify against the officers and given visas to enter the United States.
At the hearing, Charles Shapiro, a deputy assistant secretary of state, said that the State Department had no contact from the government of Mexico regarding the case, but that he could not attest to the communications of other agencies.
It was the second congressional panel on the border agents’ case. Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., held a Senate hearing on the matter earlier in July.
At the previous hearing, Sutton staunchly defended his prosecution.
Wild Thing’s comment………
Amazing how the author of this article forgot to mention the fact that the drug dealer received a get in free card to pass back and forth between the US and Mexico and used it to transport drugs.
Sutton is the one with a political agenda and with it a pat on the back from Bush. Traitor Sutton must be hoping that the SPP/NAU plan goes through.
Ramos and Campeon had the misfortune to stumble upon a drug runner who operates with the blessings of our own government. This scandal is as big and as deep as the drug operation under Clinton that took place at the Mena Airport. I wonder how many more protected drug runners there are out there? Only difference is, Bush’s runners don’t fly it in, they drive it in, and God help any Border Patrol Agents who tries to stop them. This was done to send a message to other conscientious agents. Catch one, and YOU’LL go to jail!!!
… $omeone ha$ a nice ne$t egg $omewhere, $i bonita Senora WT? Sutton and Dubya are ‘buddies’ too I hear!
Slime Sutton Favors Illegals and Drug Dealers
Mexico is calling the shots concerning these border patrol agents.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/31/72821.shtml?s=ic
Johny Sutton is President Bush’s good friend. In a town hall meeting in Tennessee, a woman confronted Bush concerning Ramos and Conception. All he would say is Johnny Sutton is his good friend and wouldn’t have done anything wrong.
Notice how the Administrations boys don’t testify. Bush basically stated that Sutton being his buddy, makes Sutton right. This is croneyism at it’s worst. One of Bush’s fatal political and character flaws is his croneyism. He thinks his personal buddies can do any task better than anyone else. Harriet Miers, Alberto Gonzalas and Johnny Sutton are just a few of too many examples.
When those 8 US attornies were fired you can bet Sutton’s name was not on that list. Sutton is no better than Nifong from the Duke case.
But what is really disturbing is sutton-fong is following the Bush mandate for his NAU plan and to keep it on course. Appease the Mexican Government, Why I don’t know.
Sutton should be hanging from a tree.
Sutton’s an idiot.
But Bush is a bigger one for not getting rid of his friend.
Just because you’re friends, doesn’t mean that you can’t be fired for bad decision making.
I like Bush, but he’s made some stupid mistakes this time around and has really irked us conservatives to death.
Darth, excellent with the well placed $$$. Yep they are buddies. When Bush was questioned about Sutton being a liar all Bush said was they were friends and he did not answer the question at all.
Bob thanks for the link and thank you for telling about what Bush had said.
Tom, that is exaclty what it is, well put too and the list you mentioned is right on target as well.
Mark, I don’t get it either. I mean are these people like Sutton getting paid some huge amount to sell their souls like this? Or are they themselves all for the NAU, because I sure am not for it at all.
razOr yes he should and I would say that right to his lying face too.
Lynn, I agree he sure has. And after those 8 years with the vile Clinton’s, we so desperately needed a really true Conservative. I like certain things about Bush, Kerry would never have fought back after 9-11, no way and Bush did. He started out so great with that and has melted down on other things that have a lot to do with our security and other things.
I’m beginning to think that Ramos & Campeon weren’t prosecuted for shooting at a drug smuggler, but for shooting at the wrong drug smuggler.
Laura Inghram’s interview with $utton showed him to be just a little too glib and waay too condescending.
And R&C is not the only case like this $utton is pursuing.