|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Democrats subpoena former White House officials in probe of
US attorney firings
By Barry Grey
14 June 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The Democratic chairmen of the House and Senate judiciary committees
on Wednesday issued subpoenas ordering two former high-ranking
Bush White House officials to testify on White House involvement
in the firing of nine US attorneys.
Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, chairman of the House committee,
executed a subpoena on former White House Counsel Harriet Miers,
calling on her to appear before his committee on July 12. Sen.
Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the chairman of the Senate committee,
issued a subpoena on Sara Taylor, until recently Bushs political
director and deputy to White House political director Karl Rove,
ordering her to appear before his committee on July 11.
The chairmen also issued a subpoena to White House Chief of
Staff Joshua Bolten to produce all White House documents relating
to the firing of the federal prosecutors.
These are the first subpoenas issued by the Democratic Congress
on the White House and on Bush officials since the congressional
investigation into the 2006 purge of US attorneys began five months
ago.
Since then, a mass of evidence has been generated from the
testimony of Justice Department officials, including Attorney
General Alberto Gonzales, documents turned over by the Justice
Department, and statements by some of the fired US attorneys showing
that the White House oversaw the firings as part of a drive to
tilt elections in favor of Republican candidates. The scheme was
to pack the US attorney system with Bush loyalists who would file
trumped-up criminal vote fraud cases against Democratic
officials and pro-Democratic voter registration groups, and compel
state election officials to purge voter rolls of poor and minority
voters.
It has been well documented that most of the nine US attorneys
who were fired were removed because they balked at filing politically
motivated vote fraud or corruption charges in advance of the 2006
elections. Others who were fired had carried out successful corruption
cases against Republican lawmakers.
Just last week six former staff attorneys at the Justice Departments
Civil Rights Division, including two former chiefs, issued a statement
documenting the systematic efforts of the Justice Department to
suppress voter turnout in low-income and minority communities.
A great deal of evidence has merged making it clear that Rove
played a central role in the political conspiracy and that Bush
himself was involved. Outgoing White House counselor Dan Bartlett,
for example, confirmed that Bush discussed firing the prosecutors
with Rove and Gonzales.
In a letter to the current White House counsel, Fred Fielding,
Rep. Conyers cited the case of David Iglesias, who was fired from
his position as US attorney in New Mexico. Conyers wrote that
Iglesias was put on the firing list only after Rove relayed complaints
about him to the White House counsels office. That happened,
Conyers said, only after Mr. Rove was specifically enlisted
by several prominent New Mexico Republicans in their effort to
have Mr. Iglesias fired. The unnamed New Mexico Republicans
included Senator Peter Domenici.
These Republicans wanted Iglesias to return corruption indictments
against Democrats before the 2006 elections.
Rove was said to be preparing an even more ambitious campaign
to influence the result of the 2008 presidential election, and
sought to get compliant prosecutors in place. Hence the dismissals
in key battleground states like New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Washington,
Michigan, Arkansas and Missouri.
Bush has repeatedly stated that he will not permit any current
or former White House officials to testify under oath and in public
before the congressional committees, promising to invoke executive
privilege if necessary. He has also declared his confidence in
Gonzales, who was his White House counsel before becoming attorney
general and himself played a direct role in launching the plan
to purge the US attorney system after the 2004 presidential election.
Both Democratic and some Republican lawmakers have called for
Gonzales to resign.
The Democrats have up to now avoided issuing subpoenas to White
House officials, despite five months of stonewalling by the Bush
administration, which has refused to hand over documents requested
by the two committees. On Monday, Democratic senators failed in
an attempt to obtain a symbolic vote of no confidence
in Gonzales, a political maneuver they had hoped would lead to
Gonzaless resignation and allow them to avoid a direct clash
with the White House.
The fact that they did not subpoena Rove or any other current
White House officials suggests that they are still looking for
some kind of compromise. On April 1, Democratic Senator Charles
Schumer of New York, who has been leading the investigation in
the Senate Judiciary Committee, offered on the CBS News program
Face the Nation to allow White House officials to
meet with the committee behind closed doors without being sworn
in, in lieu of giving public testimony under oath. This met two
of the conditions demanded by the White House, but Schumer balked
on the third: that there be no transcript of the proceedings.
The White House immediately rejected his proffered compromise.
CNNs web site cited a statement from an unnamed Democratic
congressional source on Wednesday that reflected the thinking
among Democratic lawmakers on the subpoenas they had just issued:
The reality is that this will end up in a constitutional
showdown and they will never get a chance to talk to any of the
White House witnesses.
Nevertheless, the issuing of the subpoenas sets the stage for
a possible constitutional confrontation between the executive
and legislative branches of the government.
In a joint press statement issued Wednesday by Conyers and
Leahy, Conyers declared, Let me be clear: this subpoena
is not a request, it is a demand on behalf of the American people
for the White House to make available the documents and individuals
we are requesting to help us answer the questions that remain.
He added, The breadcrumbs in this investigation have always
led to 1600 Pennsylvania [the address of the White House].
Leahy said, The involvement of the White Houses
political operation in this project, including former Political
Director Sara Taylor and her boss Karl Rove, has been confirmed
by information gathered by congressional committees. In
a letter to White House counsel Fielding, Leahy wrote, The
White Houses continuing stonewalling leads to the obvious
conclusions that the White House is hiding the truth because there
is something to hide.
The White House immediately issued a statement making clear
its intention to fight the subpoenas. Tony Fratto, the presidents
deputy press secretary, said the White House will review
the subpoenas and respond accordingly. He then said the
White House had been forthcoming in offering documents and interviews,
But its clear that Sen. Leahy and Rep. Conyers are
more interested in creating a media drama than getting the facts.
Miers, who resigned as White House counsel in January of this
year, was intimately involved in the firing of the federal prosecutors.
Thousands of pages of Department of Justice documents and hours
of testimony before the committees have revealed that Miers first
approached the Justice Department in February 2005 and suggested
that all 93 federal prosecutors be fired. That idea was rejected,
but it initiated the process that eventually led to the forced
resignation or firing of two US attorneys in March and June of
2006, and the dismissal of seven more on December 7, 2006.
For the next two years, Miers was in regular contact with D.
Kyle Sampson, Gonzaless chief of staff, who coordinated
the dismissals. Forty-six additional documents released by the
Justice Department Tuesday shed further light on Mierss
role. They show that she was involved in administration discussions
over how to respond to the growing furor over the dismissals earlier
this year, and that she opposed briefing lawmakers about the reasons
for them.
The newly released records also provide information about the
role of former White House political director Sara Taylor, who
resigned her post on May 30. An email she sent on February 16
to Sampson shows her involvement in the firing of Arkansas US
Attorney Bud Cummins in June of 2006 and his replacement by Tim
Griffin.
Griffin, a protégé of Rove and former official
with the Republican National Committee and President Bushs
2004 election campaign, was installed as interim US attorney in
Little Rock after Cummins resisted pursuing vote fraud cases against
Democrats. Griffin recently resigned his US attorney post.
In the email, Taylor complains of congressional testimony given
by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, in which McNulty acknowledged
that Cummins was fired at the urging of Miers to make way for
Roves associate, Griffin.
McNulty refuses to say Bud is lazywhich is why
we got rid of him in the first place, Taylor writes.
The case of Tim Griffin is indicative of the methods that were
employed by the White House to disenfranchise likely Democratic
voters. Working for Bushs 2004 reelection campaign, Griffin
headed up a program to prevent poor and minority people from voting
that is known as vote caging. It involves sending
registered mail to minority voters, asking for a reply, and if
no reply comes back, attempting to remove the individuals from
voter rolls, usually without their knowledge, or challenging them
when they show up at the polls.
In 2004, such registered letters were sent to the home addresses
of tens of thousands of African-Americans in Ohio, Florida, Nevada,
Wisconsin and elsewhere.
On May 24, reporter Greg Palast published on his blog an email
from Griffin to state Republicans leaders from August 2004 under
the subject caging. The email had an attachment of
lists of caged voters, presumably to be challenged
when they went to vote.
If the conflict between the White House and Congress over the
subpoenas is not resolved, the matter could end up in the federal
courts.
White House officials have routinely testified under oath before
Congress in previous administrations. During the Clinton administration,
the Republican-controlled Congress repeatedly subpoenaed White
House aides in connection with the series of bogus scandals concocted
to disrupt and even bring down the administration, from Whitewater
to the Monica Lewinsky affair.
But the Bush administration, in line with its assertion of
unchecked executive power and contempt for the constitutional
separation of powers, refuses as a matter of policy to allow White
House officials to be questioned under oath by Congress. In this
case it is all the more adamant, since such testimony could expose
its illegal and anti-democratic activities.
There is no reason to believe that the Democrats have either
the intention or the political will to seriously oppose the administrations
stonewalling. They have throughout their investigation downplayed
the most serious aspect of the US attorney firingsvoter
suppression and the manipulation of elections. Instead, they have
sought to use the probe to provide political cover for their complicity
in the continuation of the war in Iraq.
As for the White House, it announced over the weekend that
nine new attorneys have been hired for White House counsel Fieldings
office, a clear signal that any subpoenas will be litigated all
the way to the Supreme Court.
See Also:
Senate Democrats fail in slap against
Bush attorney general
[12 June 2007]
Testimony by Justice Department official
sheds light on White House conspiracy to manipulate elections
[7 June 2007]
Gonzales aide stonewalls on
White House role in firing of US attorneys
[24 May 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |