Part 12 of 32 Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales. Senator Ben Cardin questions Gonzales. 7/24/07
KEEP IN MIND: Gonzales was given each and every question he would be asked beforehand. Nothing was a surprise - there was absolutely NO "GOTCHA!"
Transcript of this portion of the hearing:
CARDIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
General Gonzales, I want to return to the U.S. attorney issue, because I think there is a great deal of concern and a lot of questions that have not been answered, and I want to give you a chance to do that.
You have offered conflicting testimonies as to who was responsible for the firing of the U.S. attorneys. We still don't know. And Senator Feinstein's questions really weren't answered. We don't know who was responsible for a particular name ending up being fired.
So let me just go over the U.S. attorneys who were fired and the concern that I think Americans have that your commitment to make sure the Department of Justice is not politicized is exactly what happened with the U.S. attorneys that were fired.
Mr. Iglesias was involved in New Mexico as U.S. attorney investigating certain Democratic -- Democrats. The prominent Republicans were very unhappy with the timing of that investigation, which I think has now become public. So there was a concern that the U.S. attorney wasn't doing what the local political establishment -- Republican establishment -- wanted.
In Nevada, there was an investigation of the Republican governor by the U.S. attorney, which certainly didn't make the local political establishment happy.
In Arizona, there was an investigation of two Republican members of Congress, which was not happy with the local Republican establishment in Arizona.
In Arkansas, there was an investigation by Mr. Cummings in regards to a Republican governor that was creating a lot of controversy.
In California, with Ms. Lam, there was the indictment and conviction of Duke Cunningham, but then the expansion of that investigation, which had Republicans concerned.
CARDIN: In Washington, the U.S. attorney declined to intervene in a disputed gubernatorial election, which angered the local Republican establishment.
And then, of course, Mr. Graves in Missouri -- we've already talked about the voter fraud investigations and the fact that the local political establishment was unhappy with that.
Here we have an unprecedented removal of U.S. attorneys without a change in party in the White House. And we look at those who were removed and find, in almost all cases, they were involved in highly visible political issues that were unpopular to the Republican establishment.
What is one to think?
And we don't have the answers from the White House. We don't have the answers from you. And we're having a very difficult time getting the information without the exertion of executive privilege.
So where do we go, in our -- what comfort can you give me that, in fact, these U.S. attorneys were fired for legitimate reasons and not because of political considerations, which all of us agree would be outrageous and wrong, if not illegal.
GONZALES: Well, Senator, I have already said repeatedly that I did not accept these recommendations with the understanding that this was to punish or interfere with an investigation for purely partisan reasons.
I accept responsibility for this. Senator Feinstein asked me: Who put the names on the list?
Quite frankly, I'm assuming this committee has talked to everyone involved in putting those names on the list and has asked that question.
CARDIN: But you haven't talked to the people in the White House?
GONZALES: I did not put the names on the list. I accepted the recommendations. There were some names on the list, the recommendations made to me, that didn't surprise me, based upon my -- what I'd heard of performance during my tenure as attorney general.
But no one, as far as I know, placed anyone on the list -- and I certainly did not accept the recommendation -- in order to punish someone because they -- they -- they...
CARDIN: But you don't know who put the names on the list?
At least, haven't quite figured out who put the names on the list...
GONZALES: That is correct.
CARDIN: So how do you know someone didn't put the names on the list because of partisan political...
GONZALES: Based on what I know, Senator -- that's what I know. You've had the opportunity, I think, to talk to everyone involved, or ask questions of those involved, more so than I.
The Office of Inspector General and OPR -- they're doing an investigation as well, to try to find out exactly how these names got on the list.
CARDIN: Let me move on to a second issue that troubles me, from your testimony today. And that is, you have talked about your visit to the hospital, the preliminary meetings with the leadership in Congress.
Those meetings are not public meetings, are they?
GONZALES: Well, what do you mean, with Congress?
CARDIN: With the gang of eight?
GONZALES: Well, I'm not sure that this meeting has been talked about, although I'm told this meeting has been -- information about the existence of this meeting has been transmitted to the Congress, I think, in a communication from the administration.
CARDIN: When you briefed the leadership of Congress and the leadership on the Intelligence Committee, are those briefings done in open session?
When you seek their advice, are they in open session?
GONZALES: No.
CARDIN: And are those proceedings kept confidential?
GONZALES: In most cases...
CARDIN: And the advice that the Congress gives you at those meetings are not released or made public?
GONZALES: In most cases, that is true.
CARDIN: And I would just suggest to you, to the extent that there is importance of confidence in working with the congressional leadership, the president's using the executive privilege to not make information available to Congress, it seems to me that you're being very selective in what information you're making available publicly.
GONZALES: Senator, I believe it's important, when people question and wonder what in the world were Andy Card and I doing going to the hospital, that it be placed in the appropriate context.
CARDIN: You're exactly right. And we want the appropriate context of the firing of the U.S. attorneys. We're entitled -- we have a responsibility to get that information.
CARDIN: And the White House -- when Sara Taylor testified, she was very clear about being able to give information that was self- serving to the White House but when we're trying to get independent information, we can't get it.
Do you understand our frustration?
GONZALES: I do understand your frustration.
CARDIN: Let me just -- I have only a few seconds left. I want to make sure I cover this last point, which is the hiring in the U.S. attorney's office.
And I very much appreciate your statement in your prepared testimony where you say, "There is no place for political considerations in the hiring of our career employees or in the administration of justice." You further assert that you plan to remain in office to fix the problem. I'm pleased that you acknowledge a problem.
We had a hearing in the Judiciary Committee with the Civil Rights Division in which the way career attorneys are now hired has been changed. It used to be that there was a -- career attorneys that reviewed those applications and made recommendations for the hiring of U.S. attorneys for the Civil Rights Division. That was taken over by political appointees.
I hope in your efforts to fix the problem that you will go back to a nonpartisan environment for selecting the career attorneys in the Department of Justice. We've had testimony here from Monica Goodling and others about White House interference and political interference that crosses the line.
And I hope as part of your efforts to fix the problem that you'll remove the political appointees from making certain recommendations or standards on bringing in career attorneys or firing or removing or repositioning career attorneys.
GONZALES: Thank you, Senator. I think we have taken those kinds of steps.
CARDIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Loading...
Gonzales reeks. He epitomizes the rank deceit rampant in this criminal administration. Time to impeach a lot of the losers in DC.
chervilant 4 years ago 3
good point Oldster...
namfoodler 4 years ago