The House Judiciary Committee voted contempt of Congress citations Wednesday against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and President Bush's former legal counselor, Harriet Miers.
The 22-17 party-line vote — which would sanction the pair for failure to comply with subpoenas on the firings of several federal prosecutors — advanced the citation to the full House.
A senior Democratic official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the House itself likely would take up the citations after Congress' August recess. The official declined to speak on the record because no date had been set for the House vote.
Wow. The terrorism excuse really is the last refuge for all the losers in the Bush administration. It would be one thing if they were actually doing something to protect us -- instead of letting Osama Bin Laden reconstitute and still rule the very terror network that attacked America. Instead, the Bushies play the terrorism card when they're in trouble. For them, it's just a political issue:
Mr. Gonzales said he wanted to focus on his department’s “No. 1 priority, keeping our country safe from terrorists, and the urgent need, quite frankly, for more help from Congress in this fight.” Specifically, he said, Congress should update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to address the vast advances in telecommunications technology in recent years and ease restrictions on gathering intelligence.
So Gonzales got pummeled by the Senators on the Judiciary Committee today -- including Specter, but this paragraph sums up the situation:
Yet for all the hostility vented at Mr. Gonzales, there was no sign that today’s hearing would change anything. President Bush has repeatedly said he stands behind Mr. Gonzales, his old friend from Texas.
And, together, Bush and Gonzales have made the country less safe.
Looks like Harriet Miers won't get her hearing tomorrow after all. George Bush told her not to show up at the House Judiciary Committee tomorrow. Yeah, not to even show up:
President Bush has told his former White House counsel, Harriet E. Miers, not to even appear on Thursday before the House Judiciary Committee investigating the firings of United States attorneys, the committee chairman said today.
Representative John D. Conyers, the Michigan Democrat who heads the panel, said he was told in a letter dated Tuesday from Ms. Miers’s lawyer that she would not appear. Mr. Conyers said the lawyer was reacting to a letter from Fred F. Fielding, the current White House counsel, asserting that “Ms. Miers has absolute immunity from compelled Congressional testimony as to matters occurring while she was a senior adviser to the president.”
Mr. Conyers said he was “extremely disappointed” at the White House’s stance, and he hoped that Ms. Miers might appear despite Mr. Bush’s assertion of executive privilege to keep her away from the hearing. It had been expected that Ms. Miers would appear and would decline to answer certain questions.
The White House’s defiance of a subpoena from Mr. Conyers’s panel intensified a showdown between the executive and legislative branches and could portend a court battle, unless a political compromise can be reached.
Can't Conyers send the Capitol Hill police to get her?
Oh sure, George Bush is invoking executive privilege. And, yes, it's not quite the Supreme Court nomination hearing she once expected, but Harriet Miers may finally end up at a Hill hearing. She probably won't be saying much, besides invoking the Fifth amendment, but she has to be there -- as does Karl Rove's aide, Sara Taylor:
Democrats involved with the two Hill investigations into the firing of the federal prosecutors are insisting that former White House aides Sara Taylor and Harriet Miers show up as requested this week at hearings -- regardless of today's claim of executive privilege.Their arguments can be summarized like this:
-- The subpoena requires two things: 1) to show up and 2) to testify. Invoking privilege does not excuse a subpoenaed witness from appearing. The House Judiciary is telling Miers to show up no matter what, and they are proceeding as if she will. She is due before House Judiciary Committee on Thursday. Taylor was summoned to appear Wednesday before the Senate committee.
President Bush invoked executive privilege Monday to deny requests by Congress for testimony from two former aides about the firings of federal prosecutors.
The White House, however, did offer again to make former counsel Harriet Miers and one-time political director Sara Taylor available for private, off-the-record interviews.
Here we go again with the "you can talk to them so long as you don't tell the public what they said, and so long as you don't take any notes and they're not under oath - so they can lie." Bush thinks he is accountable to no one, to hell with the law.
The Senate just voted to prevent further action on S J Res 14, the "no confidence in Alberto Gonzales" resolution. The vote was 53 - 38, with one voting present. 60 votes were needed to proceed to a vote on the actual resolution. So, while this wasn't the actual vote, this was a resounding and humiliating vote for Bush and Gonzales. Looks like he lost every Democrat and several Republicans, including Specter (PA), Collins (ME), Snowe (ME), Coleman (MN), Smith (OR), Hagel (NE) and Sununu (NH). Lieberman, the last Senator to vote, sided with Bush, of course. Ted Stevens (AK) voted present.
The GOP used a procedural gimmick to block the resolution -- that's basically a filibuster. They've become unbelievable obstructionists. If the Republican Senators want to spend all their time doing George Bush's dirty work, so be it.
In his floor statement during the debate, the Senate Majority Leader said Gonzales must go:
Time and time again, Alberto Gonzales has proven beyond a doubt his incompetence, misjudgment and lack of independence. He is profoundly unworthy to hold one of the highest and most important offices in the land. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution reflecting the facts before us. I urge Attorney General Gonzales to resign his office to allow America the chance to recover from his catastrophic tenure. If he does not, I urge President Bush to finally remove him.
FICTION: The Attorney General said he was unaware of the plan to fire U.S. Attorneys. "As we can all imagine, in an organization of 110,000 people, I am not aware of every bit of information that passes through the halls of the Department of Justice, nor am I aware of all decisions. As a general matter, some two years ago, I was made aware that there was a request from the White House as to the possibility of replacing all the United States attorneys. That was immediately rejected by me. I felt that that was a bad idea and it was disruptive." (Press Conference by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, 3/13/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson, the Attorney General's former Chief of Staff, said that Attorney General Gonzales was not being truthful. "I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions about U.S. attorney removals is accurate" (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson discussed the plan with Attorney General Gonzales before he left the White House Counsel's office.
Senator Schumer (D-NY): First, let's go over some of the attorney general's statements.
As you know, at a press conference on March 13th, the attorney general discussed this process of dismissing the U.S. attorneys and he said, "I never saw documents. We never had a discussion about where things stood." Was that statement accurate?
Kyle Sampson: I don't think it's entirely accurate what he said. I don't remember if the attorney general ever saw documents. I didn't prepare memos for him on this issue. But we did discuss it as early as -- before he became the attorney general, when he was the attorney general designate in January of 2005, I think; and then, from time to time, as the process was, sort of, in a thinking phase through 2005 and 2006. And then I remember discussing it with him as the process sort of came to a conclusion in the fall of 2006. (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson discussed the plan with Gonzales multiple times.
Senator Schumer (D-NY): So were there at least five?
Kyle Sampson: I don't remember specifically, but it would -- I spoke with him every day, so I think at least five. (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson continually briefed Attorney General Gonzales on the progress of the plan to fire eight United States attorneys. "Well, as I said in a previous answer, the attorney general was aware of this process from the beginning in early 2005. He and I had discussions about it during the thinking phase of the process. Then after the, sort of, more final phase of the process in the 2006 began, we discussed it. He asked me to make sure that the process was appropriate, that I was consulting with the deputy attorney general and others in developing the list. And then ultimately he approved both the list and the notion of going forward and asking for these resignations." (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Karl Rove and then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales decided that the U.S. Attorneys should go. "David – Karl Rove stopped by to ask you (roughly quoting) 'how we planned to proceed regarding US Attorneys, whether we were going to allow all to stay, request resignations from all and accept only some of them, or selectively replace them, etc.' I told him that you would be on the hill all day for the Judge's hearings, and he said the matter was not urgent." (Email from Colin Newman, Office of White House Counsel, to David Leitch, Office of White House Counsel, as reported by ABC News, 3/15/07)
FACT: Attorney General Gonzales was even involved in picking the U.S. Attorneys to be fired.
Senator Schumer (D-NY): Similarly, DOJ spokesman, on March 24th, Ms. Scolinos, said the attorney general did not participate in the selection of U.S. attorneys to be fired. Was that an accurate statement?
Kyle Sampson: I don't think that's an accurate statement. (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FICTION: Attorney General Gonzales denied being involved in White House deliberations regarding the US Attorney firings. "I don't remember that conversation…During the process there may have been other conversations about specifically about the performance of U.S. attorneys. But I wasn't involved in the deliberations as to whether or not a particular United States attorney should or should not be asked to resign.'' (NBC News, 3/26/07)
FACT: This was contradicted by his Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson and Associate Attorney General William Mercer. "Mr. Schumer said Monday that Mr. Sampson recalled that in early March, Mr. Gonzales had told him about the White House conversation -- the first time, Mr. Sampson said, that he learned of the president's concern. Mr. Sampson's lawyer, Bradford A. Berenson, declined to comment on the interview. According to Mr. Schumer, Mr. Sampson said he believed Mr. Gonzales had attended a June 2006 meeting in which Ms. Lam's removal was discussed. Another official, William W. Mercer, the acting associate attorney general, recalled with greater certainty that Mr. Gonzales was at the meeting, Mr. Schumer said." (New York Times, 4/17/07)
Today, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) announced that a vote of no confidence in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will be held this Monday.
“If all senators who have actually lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales voted their conscience, this vote would be unanimous,” said Schumer. “However, the President will certainly exert pressure to support the Attorney General, his longtime friend. We will soon see where people’s loyalties lie.”
Let's see how many of those GOP Senators actually vote their conscience. My bet is they vote with George Bush like they always do.
As David Iglesias,, the fired U.S. Attorney from New Mexico, said, "All roads lead to Rove." The NY Times is right -- it's time to hear from Karl -- under oath, with a transcript:
Congress has now heard from everyone in the Justice Department who appears to have played a significant role in the firings of the prosecutors. They have all insisted that the actual decisions about whom to fire came from somewhere else. It is increasingly clear that the somewhere else was the White House. If Congress is going to get to the bottom of the scandal, it has to get the testimony of Mr. Rove, his aides Scott Jennings and Sara Taylor, Ms. Miers and her deputy, William Kelley.
The White House has offered to make them available only if they do not take an oath and there is no transcript. Those conditions are a formula for condoning perjury, and they are unacceptable. As for documents, the White House has released piles of useless e-mail messages. But it has reported that key e-mails to and from Mr. Rove were inexplicably destroyed. At the same time, it has argued that e-mails of Mr. Rove’s that were kept on a Republican Party computer system, which may contain critical information, should not be released.
This noncooperation has gone on long enough. Mr. Leahy should deliver the subpoenas for the five White House officials and make clear that if the administration resists, Congress will use all available means to get the information it needs.
UPDATE: The hearing is live on C-SPAN3 and there's a live webcast on the House Judiciary Committee site (that I can't get on my MacBook).
The most (in)famous graduate of Pat Robertson's law school will testify before the House Judiciary Committee today at 10:15 a.m.:
After taking the Fifth Amendment to avoid detailing her role in the Justice Department ouster of eight U.S. attorneys, Monica Goodling finally appears ready to talk.
Goodling, who resigned last month as the department's White House liaison, is set to testify Wednesday about the firings that have resulted in lawmakers' demands for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' own resignation.
Her appearance before the House Judiciary Committee is part of Congress' investigation into whether last year's firings were politically motivated.
Today's NY Times has an editorial titled, "Why This Scandal Matters," which is another scathing indictment of Alberto Gonzales. They nail the problem, but it's outrageous that some still don't understand why this scandal matters:
It is now clear that United States attorneys were pressured to act in the interests of the Republican Party, and lost their job if they failed to do so. The firing offenses of the nine prosecutors who were purged last year were that they would not indict Democrats, they investigated important Republicans, or they would not try to suppress the votes of Democratic-leaning groups with baseless election fraud cases.
The degree of partisanship in the department is shocking.
It is shocking. In some ways, it's too shocking for many in the Washington punditry to grasp. I really think some reporters and columnists just can't bring themselves to believe what Bush and his lackeys have been doing. Last week, because the Bush spinmeisters told them the scandal was over, the consensus among the D.C. brain trust was the Gonzales had survived. Wrong.
For too long, Bush and his crew have manipulated the media. Rove relied on the idea that the reporters would never think them capable of all the lies, law breaking and deception. He knows the media will never call any of them liars, which has allowed the Bush team to lie without ramifications.
This scandal matters. Gonzales has to go. Some of his staffers and former staffers should be in jail.
The Bush administration really is a bad -- even worse -- than we thought. We couldn't make up some of the stuff they've done.
The Washington Post reports yet another blatant falsehood put forward by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:
The Justice Department considered dismissing many more U.S. attorneys than officials have previously acknowledged, with at least 26 prosecutors suggested for termination between February 2005 and December 2006, according to sources familiar with documents withheld from the public.
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales testified last week that the effort was limited to eight U.S. attorneys fired since last June, and other administration officials have said that only a few others were suggested for removal.
In fact, D. Kyle Sampson, then Gonzales's chief of staff, considered more than two dozen U.S. attorneys for termination, according to lists compiled by him and his colleagues, the sources said.
They amounted to more than a quarter of the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys. Thirteen of those known to have been targeted are still in their posts.
Okay, when someone says something that's not true, it's a lie. When someone says something that not true while under oath, that's a crime.
The media were buying the Bush administration spin that the U.S. Attorneys scandal was over. It's not. George Bush's Attorney General has been lying to Congress and to the American people. That's been standard operating procedure for years with the Bush crowd. But, now, there has to be accountability.
No wonder the Bush administration is fighting so hard to keep Karl Rove from testifying under oath and on the record about the U.S. Attorney firings. There's growing evidence that Rove was the force that created the scandal. Big surprise, huh?
Rove knew his candidates couldn't win on the issues. He was doing everything he could to throw the elections with the bogus claim of voter fraud. Karl has to testify now -- under oath -- on the record:
Rove, in particular, was preoccupied with pressing Gonzales and his aides about alleged voting problems in a handful of battleground states, according to testimony and documents.
Last October, just weeks before the midterm elections, Rove's office sent a 26-page packet to Gonzales's office containing precinct-level voting data about Milwaukee. A Justice aide told co
