Gonzales Written Statement for Judiciary Committee: Blame It On The Aide (Kyle Sampson)

Hissyspit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-09-07 09:31 AM
Original message

Gonzales Written Statement for Judiciary Committee: Blame It On The Aide (Kyle Sampson)

Edited on Wed May-09-07 09:35 AM by Hissyspit

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003179.php

Gonzales: Blame It on The Aide
By Paul Kiel - May 9, 2007, 10:30 AM
The House Judiciary Committee has released Alberto Gonzales' written statement in preparation for tomorrow's hearing. The story won't surprise anyone, but it's clear at least that Gonzales has honed it down to a streamlined tale of his chief of staff Kyle Sampson's failure to fulfill Gonzales' expectations.

Sampson and Gonzales had agreed, Gonzales writes, on how the U.S. attorneys to be fired should be selected. Sampson was to make the rounds among senior Justice Department officials " to collect insight and opinions" on U.S. attorneys. And he was to "provide, based on that collective judgment, a consensus recommendation of the Department�s senior leadership on districts that could benefit from a change." Nevermind that none of those DoJ officials take responsibility for having pushed for the firing of the six U.S. attorneys at the heart of the scandal. That's Gonzales' story and he's sticking to it. Gonzales will only admit that "it is clear to me that I should have done more personally to ensure that the review process was more rigorous."

Gonzales' written statement:

Near the end of the process, as I have said many times, Kyle Sampson presented me with the final recommendations, which I approved. I did so because I understood that the recommendations represented the consensus of senior Justice Department officials most knowledgeable about the performance of all 93 U.S. Attorneys. I also remember that, at some point in time, Mr. Sampson explained to me the plan to inform the U.S.
Attorneys of my decision.

- snip -

I believed the process that Mr. Sampson was coordinating would produce the best result by including those senior Justice Department officials with the most knowledge about this matter. As in other areas of the Department�s work � whether creating a plan to combat terrorism or targeting dangerous drugs like methamphetamine � my goal was to improve the performance of the Justice Department. And as in other areas of the Department�s work, I expected a process to be established that would lead to recommendations based on the collective judgment and opinions of those with the most knowledge within the Department. In hindsight, I would have handled this differently. As a manager, I am aware that decisions involving personnel are some of the most difficult and challenging decisions one can make. United States Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President, but looking back, it is clear to me that I should have done more personally to ensure that the review process was more rigorous, and that each U.S. Attorney was informed of this decision in a more personal and respectful way.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kagemusha

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-09-07 09:38 AM
Response to Original message

1. So if that DoJ consensus involved WH officials, it's Kyle's fault, eh?

Good to know.. yeah.. nice story.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Frustratedlady

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-09-07 09:45 AM
Response to Original message

2. Well, at least he's remembering some things again.

The underlings in this administration earn their money, if by no other means than being the scapegoat when things go sour.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

L. Coyote

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-09-07 10:12 AM
Response to Original message

3. SMOKE SCREEN at work. Tell the Justice Committee to look closer!

Edited on Wed May-09-07 10:14 AM by L. Coyote

What is really behind the complete take over of the DoJ by politicos?
This deserves much closer scrutiny. Check into the MONEY.

Why are USAs fired?

Lam = prosecuting Medicare Fraud, not voter fraud. And, Congressional corruption!! Can we trust Congress on this one?
Lam was prosecuting big medicine = Novation, Tenet, et.al.,
The same thing was going on in MO, investigation of Novation.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Sandbagged Novation LLC Prosecution
Kansas City, MO 04/16/07 - http://www.pressrelease365.com/pr/government/federal/alberto-gonzales-novation-prosecution-1293.htm

SMOKE SCREEN at work. Is Voting Rights and Voter Fraud just a new focus?
.... misusing the USA PATRIOT act as a pretext. .... FBI misuse of USA PATRIOT Act surveillance powers. ...interception of electronic communications and searches by law enforcement officials being used to interfere with and obstruct ... Alberto Gonzales confirmed the existence of the program for warrantless surveillance ...

Let me guess, the AG was spying on four MO illegal voter registrations. NOT!
=======================================================================
DO NOT for one minute think that this was JUST about vote suppression!!
Placing politicos in DoJ jobs can subvert more aspects of the law than voting rights.
Is the 'voting fraud' SMOKE SCREEN now being used to SMOKE SCREEN
the real reason WHY politicos are infiltratring the Justice Department????????

Tell the Justice Committee to look closer! It is about controlling Justice.

SEE: BOTH Chief US Attorney and Senior US Prosecuting Attorney found DEAD in their homes.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Consider why the Assistant US Attorneys were fired in TX. And not by Kyle Sampson!!!
White-collar crime and Medicare fraud, not voting fraud.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 01st 2024, 07:44 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.