House Seeks to Question Aide on Fifth Amendment Claim (Update3)
By James Rowley
bloomberg.com
April 3 (Bloomberg) -- House Democrats investigating the firings of eight U.S. attorneys want to question Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's special counsel about her assertion of a constitutional privilege not to answer their questions.
Monica Goodling, Gonzales's White House liaison, informed House and Senate committees through her lawyer that she would refuse to testify, citing her Fifth Amendment right against self- incrimination.
House staff lawyers want to interview Goodling next week to assess the legal validity of her refusal to testify, lawmakers said in a letter to her lawyer, John M. Dowd. The government has said she is on leave from her job.
``We are concerned that several of the asserted grounds for refusing to testify do not satisfy the well-established bases for proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment against self- incrimination,'' Michigan Democrat John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Linda Sanchez of California, who heads the administrative law subcommittee, said in the letter.
The House and Senate Judiciary Committees are investigating whether improper political considerations, such as hindering or pushing criminal investigations, were a factor in the eight dismissals. Gonzales's handling of the dismissals has prompted calls for his ouster by top Democrats and several Republican lawmakers.
Partisan Atmosphere
President Bush, asked today about the eight fired prosecutors, said, ``We have every right to replace them'' and that there was ``no credible evidence'' of wrongdoing by his administration.
Dowd said in letters last month to the House and Senate committees that Goodling faced a risk of being prosecuted for perjury if she testified at congressional hearings. He cited the partisan political atmosphere surrounding the inquiry and noted that lawmakers voiced doubts that top Justice Department officials had given accurate or complete accounts of the firings.
``The fact that a few senators and members of the House have expressed publicly their doubts about the credibility of the attorney general and deputy attorney general'' in their statements to Congress ``does not in any way excuse your client from answering questions honestly and to the best of her ability,'' Conyers and Sanchez said.
An interview with committee staff lawyers ``could obviate the need to subpoena Ms. Goodling and require her to appear'' publicly to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege, the lawmakers said.
`Confidential Setting'
If they determine there is no basis to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege, the lawmakers offered Goodling the opportunity to answer questions about what she knew about the firings ``in a private, confidential setting.''
In a statement, Dowd said the committee's ``threats of public humiliation'' to Goodling for exercising her constitutional rights ``are not well taken and are frowned upon by the courts.'' Dowd said that ``in a free country, every citizen should have the liberty to exercise their rights without threats and coercion.''
Separately, Senate Democrats asked Gonzales whether Goodling is cooperating with investigations by the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility.
Gonzales had ordered the OPR investigation into whether there was any misconduct by Justice Department officials involved in the firings. Inspector General Glenn Fine, whose office has jurisdiction to conduct criminal investigations, asked to join the inquiry.
`Required to Cooperate'
``It is our understanding that career department employees are required to cooperate with'' internal investigations, Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse said in the letter.
``Has it ever happened in the history of the Department of Justice that an attorney has refused to cooperate'' or ``asserted Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and remained an employee?'' Leahy and Whitehouse asked.
Career Justice Department employees in the past have asserted their Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions during internal investigations without losing their jobs, said Stephen Saltzburg, a former deputy assistant attorney general who now teaches at George Washington University in Washington.
Goodling would not undermine her refusal to testify before Congress if she answers questions posed by Justice Department investigators, Saltzburg said.
`Special Counsel'
Leahy and Whitehouse asked Gonzales if a ``special counsel'' had been designated to deal with inquiries from Congress about Ms. Goodling's refusal to testify before Congress because ``the office of attorney general seems hopelessly conflicted.''
Gonzales's former chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, last week testified that the attorney general's statement that he didn't participate in discussions about the firings was not accurate. The attorney general is scheduled to testify before the Senate panel on April 17.
Leahy and Whitehouse asked Gonzales whether he considered ``creating appropriate firewalls so that a non-conflicted person with appropriate knowledge and authority can have the customary discussions with the committee and the department regarding how to proceed with regard to Ms. Goodling.''
To contact the reporter on this story: James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net ;
Last Updated: April 3, 2007 18:10 EDT |
