Facebook Twitter Email
TUESDAY, MAY 14, 2002

The court official watching over the Bush administration won't rescind a highly critical report that a government attorney claimed was filled with unfounded allegations against Secretary of Interior Gale Norton.

Noting that a federal judge will ultimately determine its truthfulness, court monitor Joseph S. Kieffer III on Monday rejected a call to strip his most recent report of several controversial passages. In a harshly worded letter directed to the government attorney who made the unusual request, he defended his work.

"The seventh report will stand as it was written," he told Sandra Spooner of the Department of Justice.

Just a week ago, Spooner accused Kieffer of making "very serious allegations of misconduct" against government officials and attorneys. In particular, she said the report asserted that Norton "lied" in a departmental memorandum.

"If you have no evidence to support your allegations, we respectfully request that they be withdrawn," she wrote on May 7.

But in his response, Kieffer disputed the notion that his report was based on little or no evidence. "You have taken out of context -- or perhaps you do not understand -- several themes" of the report, he told Spooner.

Kieffer also chided Spooner for what he said was a failure to inform him properly of the existence of her request. "While Indianz.Com did report on your letter and was my first indication of its existence other than a telephone call from a third party, the Internet is no substitute for timely receipt of your correspondence," he wrote.

The beef between Kieffer and Spooner reflects the feud documented in the report in question. Kieffer detailed weeks of tensions affecting Special Trustee Tom Slonaker, the department's top trust reform official, and his deputy Tommy Thompson.

But contrary to Spooner's claims, Kieffer said he drew no conclusions about the legality of Norton's participation in the debacle. By signing two memos critical of Slonaker, Norton "was guilty of [nothing] more than accepting and adopting the oral explanations or written statements of her subordinates concerning the Special Trustee's past performance," he wrote.

Kieffer, however, reiterates the need for a full investigation into the matter. A probe could in fact confirm the "hostility" and "callousness" of those involved, he warned.

"However, those appellations would be but a small part of the censure that conduct could possibly warrant," he concluded.

Relevant Documents:
Kieffer to Spooner (5/13) | Seventh Report of the Court Monitor (5/2)

Relevant Links:
Indian Trust, Department of Interior - http://www.doi.gov/indiantrust
Indian Trust: Cobell v. Norton - http://www.indiantrust.com
Trust Reform, NCAI - http://130.94.214.68/main/pages/
issues/other_issues/trust_reform.asp

Related Stories:
Norton deflects misconduct charges (5/10)
Attack on court monitor decried (5/10)
Court report documents trust reform feud (5/3)
Court monitor discusses friction (5/2)
Official: Interior can't stop the 'bleeding' (4/22)
Judge orders trust records to stay put (4/19)
Report slams top trust reform officials (4/18)
Paper clips and lip service for trust records (4/12)
Judge rejects 'improper' request by Norton (2/6)
Special Trustee: Norton report still 'inadequate' (1/18)
Top trust official lacks 'confidence' in reform (1/9)
Trust fund progress testing 'credibility' (10/11)
Trust fund fix risking 'failure' (10/10)
Memo: Solicitor's order was 'intimidating' (10/10)
Infighting delaying trust fund fix (9/20)
Objections delaying trust fund report (9/6)