Jill Kozeny, communications director for Grassley, was responding to an Iowa Independent story in which Kiernan attacked the senator’s comparison of civilian trials for terror suspects to the murder trial of O.J. Simpson. Kiernan called Grassley’s comparison “fear mongering” designed to “distract from the larger national security issues facing our country.” He said Grassley was calling into question the constitutional right to a trial by jury.

While questioning U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Wednesday during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Grassley was attempting to make the point that assurances from the administration that the suspects would never be acquitted were not enough.

Holder said in response to Grassley’s questions that the likelihood of acquittal is remote, and if it were to happen, the suspects would never be released in the U.S. Justice Department officials told the New York Times that even if suspects are acquitted, the Obama administration will keep them locked up forever as a “combatant” under the laws of war.

“As Sen. Grassley revealed with the questions he asked yesterday, the administration’s argument for trying the terrorists in a federal court is a hollow one because the Attorney General pledged to keep the terrorists as enemy combatants regardless of the outcome in the courtroom,” she said. “The real questions are, why are terrorists being given more rights than U.S. service members fighting overseas, and why are Americans being subjected to an expensive security risk on U.S. soil if the terrorists could end up being held by the United States under military detention, just as they are being held today?”

Kozeny said Holder’s promise that the suspects will be convicted has “threatened the fairness of the trial by jury that is the bedrock of the U.S. Constitution,” a fact she says undermines Kiernan’s attacks.

While questioning Attorney General Eric Holder about the idea of prosecuting five men accused as co-conspirators in the Sept. 11 attacks in a federal court in New York, Grassley said assurances that they will be convicted ring hollow since “I think a lot of Americans thought O.J. Simpson ought to be convicted of murder, rather than being in jail for what he’s in jail for now. It seemed to me ludicrous.”

“I’m a farmer, not a lawyer, but I just wanted to make an observation,” Grassley said.

Kiernan said Grassley is engaging in “Karl Rove-style fear-mongering tactics” that are designed to “distract from the larger national security issues facing our country.”

“Trial by jury is the bedrock of the US Constitution,” Kiernan said. “Grassley calls this constitutional right into question and insults the American people, who every day make difficult and complicated decisions. There is simply no place for Grassley’s disrespectful politicization of this issue in today’s debate.”

After Grassley’s statement, Holder assured Iowa’s senior senator that even if acquitted terror suspects would not be released in the U.S.

Liberal blog Talking Points Memo has video of the exchange between Grassley and Holder.

When asked if the detainees would put Iowa residents in danger, Grassley indicated that people in Virginia, when faced with a similar situation, expressed safety concerns.

“From what I’ve heard from people around Virginia… that when there was some talk six months ago about housing them in Virginia, and the people of Virginia were very, very scared,” Grassley said, noting that such fears were expressed by the congressmen representing the area.

Grassley also noted that when the facility near Thomson, Ill., which is being considered as a possible detention site, was originally built there were concerns from Iowans.

“I think there was some concern among Iowans in Clinton at that particular time about the prison across the [Mississippi] River, that — even before they were talking about housing terrorists — [caused] some concern about having it there,” he said. “But they didn’t have anything to say over it, but there was some, some of that fear expressed.”

After noting that the Federal Bureau of Prisons has never had an escape from a facility such as the one they are proposing near the state line, and that there had also been no issues with external threats, a reporter on the conference call questioned Grassley if such fears were reasonable.

“Well, you know, it’s not something I’m going to worry about, because I’m opposed to these people coming here in the first place,” Grassley said.

Although Grassley was not aware at the start of the conference call of any telephone calls into his office concerning use of the facility by federal authorities, staff members informed him that he had received 10 calls just today — all of them opposed to housing detainees at Thomson.

U.S. Rep. Tom Latham has indicated that he will introduce legislation Thursday to block any attempt to house Guantanamo detainees in the Midwest.

U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley has attended a private briefing and various meetings in Thomson and wants further input from Iowa residents potentially impacted before making up his mind.

Grassley, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee that unanimously approved Rose’s nomination for a full vote, said he would guess that her Senate confirmation is not in jeopardy.

“I’ve had a chance to interview her, and she’s been an assistant U.S. Attorney for a long period of time,” Grassley said during a conference call. “She’s absolutely qualified to do the job she’s been appointed to.”

Rose’s handling of any one particular case, according to Grassley, should not be used as a litmus test for her entire career as a federal prosecutor. He also note how unusual it is for someone within the office ranks to be recommended and nominate for such a post.

“Very seldom does somebody at that professional career track get selected by a U.S. senator,” he said. “They usually pick someone who has been not only a good lawyer, but also very active in the political process… I think it’s quite a feather in Sen. Harkin’s hat that he’d be willing to help someone who’s been a professional all these years to advance to be a U.S. Attorney.”

During an interview with KAYL radio in Storm Lake and the Marshalltown Times Republican, Grassley said that even though he’s never studied law and is not a constitutional expert, he still believes mandating insurance coverage could be a violation of the 10^th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

“[The 10^th Amendment] says something like anything that’s not specifically delegated to the federal government is reserved to the states and the people thereof — all those rights and powers,” Grassley said, later adding: “So states, if they want to mandate you buy something, they can do it.  But that doesn’t give the federal government the right to do it.”

Therein lies the difference between mandates for health insurance and mandates on car insurance, Grassley said.

“When it comes to driving, driving under law in — in every state and under court decisions in those states is a privilege, so you don’t have to drive,” Grassley said. “But if you want to exercise that privilege, it’s got a condition. And that condition is has — have insurance.”

The provision of the bill in question would require all Americans to carry health insurance or face financial penalties, though waivers or discounts would be provided for lower-income Americans. Grassley has been accused of flip flopping on the issue of individual mandates after seeming to voice support for the idea this summer.

Lately, though, Grassley has been highly critical of the idea, questioning whether the federal government has the authority to mandate citizens buy something.

In an Op-Ed published by the D.C.-based news site Politico, University of California, Irvine School of Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky said arguing the constitutionality of individual mandates is ridiculous.

“Congress clearly could do this under its power pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to regulate commerce among the states,” Chemerinsky wrote. “The Supreme Court has held that this includes authority to regulate activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce.”

He said an “an unbroken line of precedents stretching back 70 years” has given Congress power to regulate activities that effect interstate commerce.

“People not purchasing health insurance unquestionably has this effect,” Chemerinsky said.

Grassley said that even if the individual mandate is Constitutional, there is still disagreement on whether it is the right thing to do.

Grassley’s official statement:

America’s veterans put their lives on the line to defend freedom, protect national security and secure the safety of loved ones at home.

It’s important on Veterans Day to recognize the significant contributions made each and every day by our men and women in uniform. They put their own lives on hold in noble service to their country. We owe those who serve in uniform a debt of gratitude. Because of their sacrifices, future generations of Americans will continue to live under the blessings of freedom.

Harkin’s official statement:

Each year on Veterans Day we honor those soldiers who have served and protected our country. As we think of our loved ones now gone and salute those among us who have served in the nation’s armed forces, let us also remember to honor our veterans in practical ways, by ensuring that they receive the benefits and recognition that they have earned.

In Congress, we have worked to honor the service of our men and women in uniform by providing additional funding for traumatic brain injury treatment and psychological health care, passing a 21st Century GI Bill to improve access to quality education, and providing a much needed increase in benefits to keep pace with the rising cost-of-living. Soon, the Senate will pass the annual Veterans Appropriations bill, to expand benefits for caregivers of wounded veterans, and to improve access to health care for women who have served.

While our country may never be able to fully repay our veterans for their sacrifice, we can express our gratitude and pledge to always stand with them. We send our thoughts to all the troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world and to the military families they leave behind here at home.

A contingent of World War II veterans from Iowa are currently visiting the nation’s capital as a part of the Honor Flight program.

An aide to Conlin told the Associated Press and The Des Moines Register that Conlin would file paperwork with the Federal Election Commission this week. She now joins Bob Krause of Fairfield, Tom Fiegen of Clarence and Sal Mohamed of Sioux City in the Democratic primary.

Conlin is the former president of the nation’s trial lawyers association. She ran unsuccessfully for governor in 1982 and has built a reputation as one of the country’s leading civil rights attorneys.

“The campaign now on hhs.gov is not purely informational because it expressly has visitors ‘affirm’ their commitment to work with congressional leaders to enact legislation this year,” Grassley said, and added that this “looks like the type of violation the law was written to prohibit.”

An online initiative by the U.S. Department of Health and Human services has come under fire by U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, who believes the effort is state-funded propaganda.

At Grassley’s request, a legal opinion on the subject was issued by the American Law Division at the Congressional Research Office this week, and those officials also agree with Grassley that the HHS initiative is an inappropriate use of funds and that it may violate at least three areas that govern use of appropriated funds.

“If the expenditure for the letter writing campaign to the President, supporting the President’s position with regard to health care reform proposals, is not deemed sufficiently ‘informational’ or educational, that is, that it is not a communication with the public ‘regarding its functions, policies, and activities,’ then it may be argued that it may be in violation of the general appropriations rider in Section 720, Division D, of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 as a ‘publicity or propaganda’ campaign involving a grassroots lobbying effort directed at the President.”

According to the opinion, HHS may also be in violation of another section for the Omnibus Act that prohibits publicity or propaganda “designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress.”

Finally, the legal opinion points to a possible violation of the U.S. criminal code that denies use of federal appropriations for state campaigns that are designed to influence government officials.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius contends that the initiative allows individuals to share personal stories and ideas regarding reform.

“The ‘State Your Support’ link allows individuals to express their support for health insurance reform,” she wrote in a letter this week to Grassley. “Individual who state their support and provide contact information are then notified of updates to information on the HealthReform.gov website and are occasionally invited to health reform-related events in their area.

“…[T]he Department has been careful to comply with all legal requirements with respect to this link and its other communications with the public.”

If the sword-clattering from both sides sound familiar, its because these type of disagreements — whether or not a federal agency is engaging in propaganda or pure information distribution — aren’t unusual. The players on either side vary depending on who is in control of the agencies, and the specific topic.

For instance, four years ago House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called use of taxpayer funds for government propaganda campaigns “underhanded tactics” while chiding the Bush administration.

The aide also confirms she will file paperwork with the Federal Election Commission next week.

Later in the day, that aide was outed by The Des Moines Register as Mark Daley, longtime Democratic strategist and a Conlin adviser. He also confirmed she is looking into possible staff and consultants.

Conlin said last month that she would likely join the field of Democrats vying to defeat Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. Bob Krause of Fairfield, Tom Fiegen of Clarence and Sal Mohamed of Sioux City have already declared their candidacies.

Conlin, a former president of the nation’s trial lawyers association who ran unsuccessfully for governor in 1982 and has built a reputation as one of the country’s leading civil rights attorneys, promised to raise $10 million for the campaign without taking contributions from lobbyists or political action committees.

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, of which Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley is a member with seniority, agreed today by unanimous consent to pass the nominations of Stephanie Rose and Nick Klinefeldt on to the full Senate.

“These individuals are enthusiastic, intelligent attorneys, and I’m pleased to support their nominations,” Grassley wrote in his statement for the committee. “I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for [them].”

Nick Klinefeldt & Stephanie Rose

Although both nominees are considered well-qualified for the positions, neither has been able to escape criticism.

Rose’s critics point to her role in the prosecution of the more than 300 immigrants that were detained in the raid at Agriprocessors in Postville. Criticism of Klinefeldt, which has been little more than a whisper when compared to the organized and often aggressive effort against Rose, has not centered on him personally, but on the fact that his father is currently serving a 10-year sentence on drug-related charges. In each instance, Harkin has vehemently defended the two attorneys.

In addition to the two Iowa nominees, the committee also approved by unanimous consent the nomination of Kenyen Brown for U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama.

If confirmed by the Senate, Klinefeldt will replace Matt Whitaker, who was nominated by then-President George W. Bush and unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate in June 2004. If confirmed, Rose will replace Matt Dummermuth, an attorney recommended by Grassley and appointed by then-President George W. Bush in January 2007. Although nominated by the Bush administration in December 2008, Dummermuth never faced Senate confirmation.

There are a total of 93 U.S. Attorney posts in the nation. To date, including the three nominees today, the Judiciary Committee has approved 24 individuals, and 18 of those have gone to be confirmed by the Senate.