Ex-Justice Official's Statements Contradict Gonzales on Firings

[sabra]

Source: WP

The former Justice Department official who carried out the firings of eight U.S. attorneys last year told Congress that several of the prosecutors had no performance problems and that a memo on the firings was distributed at a Nov. 27 meeting attended by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, a Democratic senator said yesterday.

The statements to House and Senate investigators by Michael A. Battle, former director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, represent another potential challenge to the credibility of Gonzales, who has said that he never saw any documents about the firings and that he had "lost confidence" in the prosecutors because of performance problems.

Battle's statements, relayed to reporters yesterday by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), came as Gonzales prepares for a make-or-break appearance on Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Prepared testimony released yesterday indicates Gonzales will apologize to the fired prosecutors for the way they were treated and will acknowledge that he has been "less than precise" in describing his role in the firings.

...

The statements by Battle, who left his job last month, are the first details to emerge from more than 20 hours of interviews with four top Gonzales aides over the past two weeks by staff members on the House and Senate Judiciary committees. The last of those interviews was conducted yesterday with Sampson, who testified publicly last month that he was only an "aggregator" of information on the firings and that ultimate responsibility rested with Gonzales.

Battle told investigators that he was "not aware of performance problems with respect to several" of the prosecutors when he called to fire them, Schumer said in a conference call with reporters yesterday.





Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/15/AR2007041500548.html?hpid=topnews

[truthisfreedom]

1. Bad news for gonzo.

If gonzo and wolfie both lose their jobs in the coming weeks, I'll smile really wide.

[DCKit]

2. Who else said that Schumer, Waxman, et. al. knew more about it all than they were letting on?

They're building a case and when they're ready, it's going to be a blood-bath. Yeah!!!!!!

[Kablooie]

4. I wish so ... but ...

I have no faith that anything will really happen.

Why do you think Bush and his minions have been working so hard to get secret information on everyone in the country.

Anyone that becomes a serious threat will be confronted, in private, with some horrendous charges that the Bushies can "prove" and suddenly the confrontation wanders away from something else.

And if the Congress still proceeds, watch how a new Congressional scandal unfolds and becomes the first page news all over the country. (While the administrations crimes remain on the back of page 10)

Just watch. You'll see.

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. Another terrific entry from

[Kablooie]

14. I am dark and gloomy because I am so often wrong.

Therefore if I expect the worst, the worst is not likely to happen.

I'm sunny in a dark, hidden sort of way.

[jilln]

3. Where are all these people when the problems start??

Why aren't they coming forward and telling us about the law breaking? Why aren't these people going to work with hidden tape recorders and video cameras???

[Manifestor_of_Light]

6. Will Battle be the canary with a conscience, like John Dean was?

[LizW]

7. kick

[speedoo]

8. K&R nt

[myrna minx]

9. Kick. n/t

[Joe Chi Minh]

10. "I have nothing to hide and . . . I am committed to assuring the Congress and the American public

that nothing improper occurred here," Gonzales says in his remarks."

Wow! These blokes take weasel-words to a whole 'nother level, don't they?

Translation:

Boy to school-teacher:

"I am committed to assuring you that our dog ate my homework. Heaven forfend that I should be responsible for misleading you on that subject!"

How grand and dignified does that sound? You cannot help but be awestruck by the barefaced speciousness of their parlance.

Then:

In his prepared remarks for Tuesday, Gonzales says "my statement about 'discussions' was imprecise and overbroad, but it certainly was not in any way an attempt to mislead the American people."

Translation:

"My statement about 'discussions' was clumsy and vague, rather than forensic and specific, but its misleading nature was due to incompetence, not deliberate design."

[jwirr]

11. Is this the same Battle that was involved in stealing Iraq's money

through faulty contracts? The story was on LINK last night.

[Arkansas Granny]

12. Can someone explain to me how a Justice Department official

fires US attorneys without the knowledge or involvment of the Attorney General or the President that appointed them and whose pleasure they serve?

[MasonJar]

13. "Less than precise." How quaint!

[L. Coyote]

15. kick