Reply #70: I think I do.

[Edmond Dantes]

The answer is "not necessarily."

If I remember correctly, the AG has a statutory duty to provide legal advice to the President. That function is carried out by the Office of Legal Counsel. Sometimes the OLC legal opinions are issued under the signature of an OLC deputy assistant attorney general (as is the case with JOHN YOO, who held himself out as an expert in the substantive legal area). Many times, the OLC opinions are signed by the OLC assistant attorney general, who is the head of the office.

If the legal opinion is REALLY REALLY important, OLC will write it for the AG, but it is issued as an Attorney General Opinion (not an OLC opinion) under the signature of the AG. (There are several volumes of published "Opinions of the Attorney General.")

That Ashcroft himself testified (instead of the Asst. AG for OLC) does make me wonder whether there is yet another confidential legal opinion lurking somewhere -- one signed by Ashcroft himself. However, the political appointees in OLC who wrote those controversial memoranda have since left DOJ. That may be why Ashcroft testified (at the specific request of the Senate Judiciary Committee). After all, Ashcroft does head the Department and is ultimately responsible for what transpires within its corridors.

It is my understanding that Ashcroft has little to do with DOJ's day-to-day operations. That is handled primarily by the Deputy AG. I believe that the current DAG did not arrive until AFTER the OLC opinion(s) had been issued. Therefore, one can't really expect the current DAG to step up to the plate and take responsibility for this.

That leaves the unknowledgeable Ashcroft to face the Senate Committee -- and he would rather be singing about eagles or holding morning prayer services in his office.

I hope this is helpful.