July 31, 2007
House Dems Push Gonzales Impeachment; Specter Unhappy With WH Response
UPDATED.
Democratic Rep. Jay Inslee today laid out a case for forcibly removing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales from office, after filing a resolution [PDF] that would kick off preliminary impeachment proceedings.
"Americans of all stripes believe that we deserve an attorney general who will not allow the politicization of the judicial system," said the former prosecutor, flanked by other former officers of the law turned legislators. The attorney general should "respect the laws of privacy" and "be forthright with the American people and U.S. Congress," Inslee added.
If the resolution receives a simple majority, the House Judiciary Committee will conduct an investigation into whether Gonzales has committed any impeachable offenses, such as perjury.
The months-long investigation into the politically tinged firings of U.S. attorneys last year, and a related one into a secret surveillance program considered by many in DOJ to be illegal, has cast Gonzales in an unflattering light. He was elevated to the job from White House counsel in February 2005.
Democrats and Republicans alike have pushed for Gonzales to be fired or resign, but both the attorney general and President Bush, a longtime friend and career benefactor, have refused to give in. The White House has also ignored congressional subpoenas in the ongoing investigations.
Calling impeachment a "last resort," Inslee said that Congress' and the public's loss of faith in Gonzales was harmful to the judicial system and therefore to democracy. "Accordingly, I am here today with a number of colleagues to call on the Judiciary Committee in the House of Representatives to conduct a thorough investigation to determine whether articles of impeachment are appropriately lodged against the attorney general," the Washington lawmaker said.
In addition to fellow former prosecutors Michael Arcuri (N.Y.), Xavier Becerra (Calif.), Bruce Braley (Iowa), Ben Chandler (Ky.), Dennis Moore (Kan.), and Tom Udall (N.M.), nine other Democrats have signed on to the bill.
Udall said that although the evidence was stacked against the AG, the group wanted a bipartisan investigation before weighing an impeachment vote in order to "afford him due process [that] was denied to the people he fired."
It will be more than a month before the resolution is even considered for a floor vote, but Inslee expressed confidence that the pressure to impeach would pick up steam. "The revulsion and the embarrassment at the attorney general's office is a bipartisan affair. As we go home in August and we understand Americans don't think there should be partisanship in the judicial system, we will grow our ranks," he said.
The "due process" mentioned by Udall and others at the press conference mostly seemed to be a formality. In the Senate, Democrats led by Patrick Leahy and Republicans led by Arlen Specter wanted Gonzales to step down long ago. But the scandal has been a political gift to the Democrats in many ways, and some Republicans dismissed the resolution as a time-consuming stunt.
"In a court of law, an individual is innocent until proven guilty," said Lamar Smith, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee. "Democrats have ignored this fundamental principle and have chosen instead to engage in a politically motivated campaign to slander the Justice Department and undermine the credibility of federal law enforcement."
House Democrats have a full legislative plate to tackle before the August recess, and it's unclear how much enthusiasm there is to push Gonzales out when he's already considered ineffectual and irrelevant. A spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said earlier today that Pelosi "understands the resolution is in response to great bipartisan concern about the attorney general, but this week our focus is on child health, energy, ending the war... the key legislative priorities that are on the floor."
John Conyers, the committee's Democratic chairman, hasn't signaled support for the resolution. His Senate counterpart, Leahy, has given Gonzales until Friday to reconcile his prior testimony or face a perjury probe. Specter, the ranking Republican on the committee, asked the Bush administration to send a letter explaining the conflicting testimony by noon today. In what is becoming a pattern, the White House seems to have ignored that request.
The response Specter finally received in the late afternoon from Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell suggested Gonzales' statements about the secret program were truthful -- on a technicality.
"I understand that the phrase 'Terrorist Surveillance Program' was not used prior to 2006 to refer to the activities authorized by the president," McConnell wrote.
The "activities" refer to a secret surveillance program at the center of an internal DOJ-White House dispute three years ago. Lawmakers are keenly interested in details of the program because so few are available; the aspects deemed illegal by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and others were quietly scrapped.
Controversy over the program was revived in May when former Deputy AG James Comey, testifying on the attorney firings, told lawmakers about a late-night encounter in which Gonzales, then White House counsel, and former White House Chief of Staff Andy Card, appeared to be pressuring an ailing, post-surgical Ashcroft to sign off on the program. (The Gate has accounts of Comey's testimony here and here.)
FBI Director Robert Mueller, who reportedly threatened to quit over the program, was also present at the March 2004 visit to Ashcroft's hospital room, and last week refuted Gonzales' sworn assertion that the Terrorist Surveillance Program had not been at issue.
What McConnell may be saying in his letter to Specter is that the Terrorist Surveillance Program was indeed not an issue, because the program in place then had not yet taken on that name. In what seemed a hastily arranged interview on CNN's "Situation Room," Specter rejected McConnell's explanation.
The Pennsylvania Republican also said that DOJ was "dysfunctional" under Gonzales, but stopped short of calling for the AG's ouster. When asked about Vice President Dick Cheney's earlier expression of support for Gonzales, Specter said, "I'm honored to disagree with him from time to time."
Unlike the Democrats, Specter is willing to meet the White House half way and interview administration officials off the record and not under oath on the firings. But, he said, if the results are unsatisfactory he will use his oversight authority to compel testimony and witnesses. He added that he still expects Gonzales to clarify his testimony.
Last week, a group of four Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee requested a special prosecutor to head up a perjury probe. But as The Gate reported, the person in charge of greenlighting a special prosecutor is also the White House's top legal advocate, Solicitor General Paul Clement.
Posted at 6:52 PM
Posted to:
Alberto Gonzales, Arlen Specter, Attorney Scandal, Bush Administration, Congress, House, James Comey, John Ashcroft, Patrick Leahy, President Bush, Robert Mueller, Senate
Share via
