S
Sid9
Guest
F.B.I. Chief Challenges Gonzales's Testimony
By DAVID STOUT
Published: July 26, 2007
WASHINGTON, July 26 - The dispute over the truthfulness of Attorney General
Alberto R. Gonzales reached a new intensity today as the F.B.I. Director,
Robert S. Mueller 3rd, contradicted Mr. Gonzales's sworn testimony before a
Senate committee.
Mr. Mueller told the House Judiciary Committee that the Bush administration's
secret eavesdropping program was the main topic at an encounter in the
hospital room of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft on March 10, 2004,
contrary to what Mr. Gonzales told a Senate panel on Tuesday.
At the time, Mr. Gonzales was the White House counsel, and Mr. Ashcroft was
recovering from gall bladder surgery. That March night, Mr. Gonzales went to
the hospital room with Andrew H. Card Jr., then White House chief of staff.
In his testimony before the Senate panel on Tuesday, Mr. Gonzales said the
subject in the hospital room was "intelligence activities" under debate in
the administration, but not the secret eavesdropping program.
But Mr. Mueller contradicted that version of events today, several hours
after four Senate Democrats called for the appointment of a special counsel
to investigate whether Mr. Gonzales perjured himself before Congress.
Mr. Mueller was testifying at an F.B.I. oversight hearing when he was
questioned by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, Democrat of Texas.
"Did you have an understanding that the conversation was on T.S.P.?" the
Congresswoman asked, using the shorthand for terrorist surveillance program.
"I had an understanding the discussion was on an N.S.A. program, yes," Mr.
Mueller replied, using the abbreviation for the National Security Agency. A
moment later, he added that the discussion was on the warrantless
eavesdropping program "that has been much discussed, yes."
The conflict in accounts could be significant, because Mr. Gonzales's
critics have accused him of trying to convey the false impression that the
N.S.A. program had spawned no serious dissension within the Bush
administration.
But former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey has testified that Justice
Department lawyers were balking at recertifying the program early in 2004
and that he thought Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card rushed to the hospital to
persuade Mr. Ashcroft, who was not at full capacity, to overlook his own
objections to the program.
Mr. Mueller said that after receiving a call from Mr. Comey he went to the
hospital, arriving shortly after Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card left, and that
after he spoke with Mr. Ashcroft he understood that the N.S.A. program was
indeed the focus of the dramatic bedside encounter.
There have been repeated instances in which lawmakers have questioned Mr.
Gonzales's competence and his recollection of events. But today's
developments seemed to mark a shift toward suggestions that he actually
committed crimes in testifying before Congress.
The four senators who sought a special counsel are all members of the
Judiciary Committee. They urged Solicitor General Paul D. Clement in a
letter to name an independent counsel from outside the Justice Department.
"It has become apparent that the attorney general has provided at a minimum
half-truths and misleading statements," the senators wrote.
While the four were asking for a special counsel, the chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, announced that a
subpoena was being issued to Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political
adviser, to provide information on the firings last year of nine federal
prosecutors. The White House has asserted executive privilege in resisting
Congressional demands for testimony by present and former presidential
aides.
The request that the solicitor general name a special counsel to investigate
Mr. Gonzales marked a new stage in the long-running controversy over his
stewardship of the Justice Department. Mr. Gonzales's most outspoken critics
suggested today that the attorney general might have committed crimes,
including perjury and obstruction of justice, when he testified about
President Bush's domestic-surveillance program and the dismissal of the nine
United States attorneys.
The four senators - Charles E. Schumer of New York, Dianne Feinstein of
California, Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode
Island - zeroed in today on Mr. Gonzales's testimony that there had been no
internal dissent over the president's warrantless eavesdropping program and
that an emergency meeting at the White House in March 2004 concerned
subjects other than the secret eavesdropping operation.
"Both of those statements appear to be false," Mr. Schumer said today. "We
know from senators who were there, and we know from a letter from John
Negroponte," he went on, referring to the former director of national
intelligence. "It's in black and white."
The letter from the four senators was addressed to the solicitor general
because Mr. Gonzales has recused himself, as has the outgoing deputy
attorney general, Paul J. McNulty.
A Justice Department spokesman, Brian Roehrkasse, said on Wednesday that Mr.
Gonzales stood by his testimony. And the White House spokesman, Tony Snow,
said today that Mr. Bush still stood by Mr. Gonzales.
After Mr. Gonzales's most recent testimony on Tuesday, Justice Department
aides acknowledged in a background briefing for reporters that the attorney
general had caused confusion by his "linguistic parsing." A special counsel,
if one is named, would presumably try to determine if any of Mr. Gonzales's
ambiguous statements were outright lies.
Senator Feinstein said today that Mr. Gonzales has often given "misleading
and often untrue statements to Congress," and that she had never seen "an
attorney general so contemptuous of Congress and his role as the chief law
enforcement officer of the United States."
A spokesman for the Democratic majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of
Nevada, told The Associated Press that Mr. Reid supported the request for a
special counsel.
By DAVID STOUT
Published: July 26, 2007
WASHINGTON, July 26 - The dispute over the truthfulness of Attorney General
Alberto R. Gonzales reached a new intensity today as the F.B.I. Director,
Robert S. Mueller 3rd, contradicted Mr. Gonzales's sworn testimony before a
Senate committee.
Mr. Mueller told the House Judiciary Committee that the Bush administration's
secret eavesdropping program was the main topic at an encounter in the
hospital room of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft on March 10, 2004,
contrary to what Mr. Gonzales told a Senate panel on Tuesday.
At the time, Mr. Gonzales was the White House counsel, and Mr. Ashcroft was
recovering from gall bladder surgery. That March night, Mr. Gonzales went to
the hospital room with Andrew H. Card Jr., then White House chief of staff.
In his testimony before the Senate panel on Tuesday, Mr. Gonzales said the
subject in the hospital room was "intelligence activities" under debate in
the administration, but not the secret eavesdropping program.
But Mr. Mueller contradicted that version of events today, several hours
after four Senate Democrats called for the appointment of a special counsel
to investigate whether Mr. Gonzales perjured himself before Congress.
Mr. Mueller was testifying at an F.B.I. oversight hearing when he was
questioned by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, Democrat of Texas.
"Did you have an understanding that the conversation was on T.S.P.?" the
Congresswoman asked, using the shorthand for terrorist surveillance program.
"I had an understanding the discussion was on an N.S.A. program, yes," Mr.
Mueller replied, using the abbreviation for the National Security Agency. A
moment later, he added that the discussion was on the warrantless
eavesdropping program "that has been much discussed, yes."
The conflict in accounts could be significant, because Mr. Gonzales's
critics have accused him of trying to convey the false impression that the
N.S.A. program had spawned no serious dissension within the Bush
administration.
But former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey has testified that Justice
Department lawyers were balking at recertifying the program early in 2004
and that he thought Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card rushed to the hospital to
persuade Mr. Ashcroft, who was not at full capacity, to overlook his own
objections to the program.
Mr. Mueller said that after receiving a call from Mr. Comey he went to the
hospital, arriving shortly after Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card left, and that
after he spoke with Mr. Ashcroft he understood that the N.S.A. program was
indeed the focus of the dramatic bedside encounter.
There have been repeated instances in which lawmakers have questioned Mr.
Gonzales's competence and his recollection of events. But today's
developments seemed to mark a shift toward suggestions that he actually
committed crimes in testifying before Congress.
The four senators who sought a special counsel are all members of the
Judiciary Committee. They urged Solicitor General Paul D. Clement in a
letter to name an independent counsel from outside the Justice Department.
"It has become apparent that the attorney general has provided at a minimum
half-truths and misleading statements," the senators wrote.
While the four were asking for a special counsel, the chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, announced that a
subpoena was being issued to Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political
adviser, to provide information on the firings last year of nine federal
prosecutors. The White House has asserted executive privilege in resisting
Congressional demands for testimony by present and former presidential
aides.
The request that the solicitor general name a special counsel to investigate
Mr. Gonzales marked a new stage in the long-running controversy over his
stewardship of the Justice Department. Mr. Gonzales's most outspoken critics
suggested today that the attorney general might have committed crimes,
including perjury and obstruction of justice, when he testified about
President Bush's domestic-surveillance program and the dismissal of the nine
United States attorneys.
The four senators - Charles E. Schumer of New York, Dianne Feinstein of
California, Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode
Island - zeroed in today on Mr. Gonzales's testimony that there had been no
internal dissent over the president's warrantless eavesdropping program and
that an emergency meeting at the White House in March 2004 concerned
subjects other than the secret eavesdropping operation.
"Both of those statements appear to be false," Mr. Schumer said today. "We
know from senators who were there, and we know from a letter from John
Negroponte," he went on, referring to the former director of national
intelligence. "It's in black and white."
The letter from the four senators was addressed to the solicitor general
because Mr. Gonzales has recused himself, as has the outgoing deputy
attorney general, Paul J. McNulty.
A Justice Department spokesman, Brian Roehrkasse, said on Wednesday that Mr.
Gonzales stood by his testimony. And the White House spokesman, Tony Snow,
said today that Mr. Bush still stood by Mr. Gonzales.
After Mr. Gonzales's most recent testimony on Tuesday, Justice Department
aides acknowledged in a background briefing for reporters that the attorney
general had caused confusion by his "linguistic parsing." A special counsel,
if one is named, would presumably try to determine if any of Mr. Gonzales's
ambiguous statements were outright lies.
Senator Feinstein said today that Mr. Gonzales has often given "misleading
and often untrue statements to Congress," and that she had never seen "an
attorney general so contemptuous of Congress and his role as the chief law
enforcement officer of the United States."
A spokesman for the Democratic majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of
Nevada, told The Associated Press that Mr. Reid supported the request for a
special counsel.
