SEN. BROWNBACK QUESTIONS Cont'd: AG — if you look at some of the documents, you can see that the Deputy AG agonized over Bogden. At the end of the day, we felt that it was the right decision. I regret that we didn't have a face to face meeting with him to confer about this. (CHS notes: And now we are talking about interal personnel policies and styles, which, last I checked, are the responsibility of the AG.) Brownback asks about Charlton of AZ, and asks AG to be concise. AG says that Charlton had issues with a particular death penalty case. AG says he made a decision about a particular case on May 15th about a particular case, and asked him to reconsider — AG was miffed that he was asked to reconsider. Since Dec. 7, he has also learned that there was a question about implementing a policy on targets that was different from other areas of the country — to do something unilaterally like that is questionable, but AG learned about this after the fact. Ryan? AG says he was not surprised to see him on the list — poor management.
Chiara? I don't recall why we made the decision on her in December. I have since learned about poor judgment and management questions, we had to send someone out to mediate a dispute. Cummins? He was on a different track — was asked to resign on June 14th. Was asked to resign because there was another well-qualified individual that the WH wanted to place there because he was well-qualified (read: Karl Rove's political crony pal.) Question of seeing if there might be a vacancy coming up and making certain that we had a well-qualified candidate for the job. McKay — recall that it was a question of judgment. I have since learned that the way he pursued a particular project and that there was friction with the Deputy Attorney General, indiciation of poor judgment because he sent a letter about this project and had people sign on without knowing that it would cause friction. Questions about resources — made the DoJ look bad to people outside the department. Brownback says he's glad to hear the factual basis.
SEN. LEAHY CLARIFICATION: On Cummings, you testified that you overlooked what had happened? Did you ever send a follow-up to that testimony? AG says he doesn't recall sending a correction or follow-up. Leahy says you know we leave the record open for you to correct. AG doesn't recall doing so.
SEN. KOHL QUESTIONS: Questions of politicization of prosecutions in WI. Prosecutions routed through Rove's office to Sampson. Was Biskupic ever on the list of USAs to be dismissed? I was never aware that he was on the list, but I am aware that he may have been on aproblem list — Biskupic has said and issued a press release that he was not aware of being on a list. Kohl says if he was on the list, why was he taken off the list? AG says "This was a process that I did not have transparency into this." Kohl says could you get back to me as to why he was on the list and then taken off? AG says with all due respect, ask Sampson. I'll see if there is something I can do, but he doesn't want to compromise this investigation on this. (CHS notes: Essentially, you'll have to ask Sampson and Rove — you know, Rove who is refusing to testify under oath at this point. Helpful.) I'm sure we can agree that the AG office is more important than the person that sits in it — what is the rationale for you staying in the job, with the low morale at the DoJ and questions of the taint of politicization? AG responds that six weeks prior to the election, they took plea from former Rep. Ney — looking at the best thing for the case, not politics. Politicization of the department is just not true — when you raise questions, you are attacking the career prosecutors, and that's not right. (CHS: variation on the "if you question the President, you are unpatriotic" theme.) AG says that he looks back on his tenure at the department with pride — we have done great things, and the department in general has not been mismanaged. The work of the department continues. Cases are still being invstigated, are still being prosecuted. I have instructed all the USAs that no cases should be sped up or slowed down because of the actions. Kohl says that he appreciates that, but that 2/3rds of the American public believes that politics played a role and have lost confidence in your leadership fo the DoJ. Kohl getting at the "putting the Department before yourself" question. AG says that he believes that he can continue to be effective, and the moment that he believes he can't continue, he will resign. AG says the notion that something improper happened here is simply not supported by the documents (CHS notes: that we have decided to give you to look at, but of course there are a whole lot more out there that no one as yet has.)
More on the testimony.
No comments:
Post a Comment