Ex-Aide Says Gonzales Statement on Firings Was Wrong (Update1)
By Robert Schmidt and Jay Newton-Small
March 29 (Bloomberg) -- Alberto Gonzales's ex-chief of staff contradicted his former boss, asserting that the attorney general was wrong in saying he wasn't involved in discussions on firing eight U.S. prosecutors.
Kyle Sampson, testifying today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he and Gonzales spoke at least five times over two years about plans to dismiss some federal prosecutors. Gonzales and then-White House Counsel Harriet Miers signed off on the final decision, Sampson said.
``I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions about U.S. attorney removals was accurate,'' Sampson told the committee in Washington. ``The attorney general was aware of this process from the beginning in early 2005.''
The Senate and House are investigating whether the prosecutors were dismissed last year for improper political motives such as interfering with criminal probes. Democratic leaders and some Republicans are calling for Gonzales to resign over the firings. Sampson, 37, quit as Gonzales's chief of staff on March 12.
The following day, Gonzales told reporters he ``was not involved in any discussions about what was going on'' with the firings. The attorney general said he delegated the project to Sampson, who he said didn't keep senior agency officials properly informed about the terminations.
`Thinking Phase'
Sampson said today that he and Gonzales discussed the dismissals ``during the thinking phase'' and at ``the more final'' part of the process at the end of 2006.
``Then, ultimately, he approved the list,'' as did Miers, Sampson said.
Gonzales attended a meeting on the firings on Nov. 27, less than two weeks before most of the prosecutors were fired, Sampson said. The Justice Department released a document last week that showed the attorney general was at the meeting. Gonzales didn't mention the meeting when he spoke to the media on March 13.
``I'm disappointed he didn't remember that in his statement,'' said Senator Jeff Sessions, a Republican from Alabama.
Gonzales has since ``clarified'' his comments on not being kept informed, Sampson said. In an interview with NBC News on March 26, Gonzales said he discussed the possible firings with Sampson, who occasionally ``would tell me something that would confirm in my mind that that process was ongoing.''
Sampson told lawmakers he agreed with Gonzales that the firings were appropriate. The U.S. attorneys were asked to leave for ``legitimate reasons'' and not to interfere with criminal investigations, Sampson said.
Priorities
``I'm not aware of any of the United States attorneys being asked to resign for the improper political purpose of influencing a case for political benefit,'' Sampson said. ``I'm aware that some were asked to resign because they weren't carrying out the president and the attorney general's priorities.''
Sampson told the senators that ex-U.S. Attorney Carol Lam in San Diego was asked to leave partly because of her poor record prosecuting immigration cases, not because she led a political corruption probe involving ex-Representative Randall ``Duke'' Cunningham and potentially other lawmakers. Cunningham, a California Republican, was sentenced to eight years and four months in prison last year.
David Iglesias, the U.S. attorney in New Mexico whose office was investigating Democrats in a local corruption matter, also wasn't pushed out because of his cases, Sampson testified.
`No Evidence'
Some Republicans on the committee said they were satisfied that the firings, while bungled, weren't improper.
``From everything that this committee's heard so far, or at least I've heard, there's no evidence that the firings of these U.S. attorneys was done to impede a criminal investigation,'' said Senator John Cornyn of Texas.
Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said he is still interested in hearing from Gonzales himself.
The Justice Department ``is in a state of disrepair and perhaps dysfunctional'' and morale is low, Specter said. ``We need to know what was the role of the attorney general.''
Democrats said Sampson's testimony is merely a starting point as the panel seeks to pin down why the federal prosecutors -- all Republican appointees -- were dismissed.
``Regrettably, what we've heard from the administration has been a series of shifting explanations, excuses, a lack of accountability or even acknowledgement of the seriousness of the matter,'' said Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, of Vermont. ``Our goal is to get to the bottom of what happened and also why it happened.''
`Pointing the Finger'
``Many people in the Justice Department are pointing the finger at Kyle Sampson, but today we hear Mr. Sampson's side of the story,'' said Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York. ``Kyle Sampson was at the epicenter of this and should know those facts better than anyone else.''
As chief of staff, Sampson helped prepare the attorney general and his deputy, Paul McNulty, to give congressional testimony about the firings, which lawmakers say was misleading.
Yesterday, the Justice Department acknowledged it made misstatements in a February letter to lawmakers that said Bush political adviser Karl Rove wasn't involved in the firings.
Sampson, in his testimony, said he conferred with Justice Department officials about which prosecutors should be fired, and that he provided the information to the White House.
``Others in the department knew what I knew about the origins and timing of this enterprise,'' Sampson said.
The 93 U.S. attorneys are appointed by Bush and serve at his discretion. They must be confirmed by the Senate.
To contact the reporters on this story: Robert Schmidt in Washington at rschmidt5@bloomberg.net ; Jay Newton-Small in Washington at jnewtonsmall@bloomberg.net .
Last Updated: March 29, 2007 14:12 EDT |
