Specter gives Gonzales 18 hours

July 31, 2007

Over the weekend, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) said he expects Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to “revise” his deceptive testimony this week, or the matter would escalate. Yesterday, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said he’s not even willing to wait the full week.

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, Arlen Specter (Pa.), emerged from a crucial Monday briefing and gave the Bush administration 18 hours to resolve the controversy over apparent contradictions in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s congressional testimony.

Gonzales took issue last week with former Deputy Attorney General James Comey’s description of internal dissent in 2004 over the legal authority for the National Security Agency’s (NSA) warrantless eavesdropping program. Frustrated Democrats called for a special prosecutor to investigate Gonzales for perjury, noting that several officials have publicly echoed Comey’s account. Those calls prompted Specter to request a classified briefing to clear up the dispute.

Specter aides released a statement late Monday that suggested a bombshell to come on Tuesday afternoon.

It must have been quite an informative meeting (given by Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell). Specter appears to be even more convinced — and last week, he seemed pretty sure — that Gonzales intentionally misled him and his colleagues in sworn testimony.

“Given the difficulty of discussing classified matters in public, I think it is preferable to have a letter addressing that question [of Gonzales’ veracity] from the administration … by noon tomorrow, which will be made available to the news media,” Specter wrote in a statement on the AG’s new deadline. “The administration has committed to producing such a letter.”

We’ll see what they come up with later today.

In other Gonzales related news:

* House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers’ (D-Mich) noticed the news over the weekend about the classified data-mining program that purportedly exonerates Gonzales from perjury charges (it doesn’t, but that was its apparent purpose). Conyers is now curious a) why this information was leaked to the media at such a convenient time; and b) when lawmakers can expect to learn more about these new revelations.

* In light of FBI Director Robert Mueller’s recent testimony, which further cemented Gonzales’ reputation as someone unwilling to tell the truth, there are apparently some new hostilities in the Department of Justice. The New York Daily News reported that a “distinctly cold air has settled between FBI headquarters on Pennsylvania Ave. and the main Justice building directly across the street.” Mueller aide said, “You could open an ice rink between the buildings.”

* Two new op-eds ran today, defending Gonzales against perjury charges. The first was in the WSJ, written by GOP lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey, the other by the WaPo’s Ruth Marcus. Anonymous Liberal “delved once again into the weeds of the perjury case” to explain why they’re wrong.

Stay tuned.

Republican, Arlen Specter (Pa.), emerged from a crucial Monday briefing and gave the Bush administration 18 hours to resolve the controversy over apparent contradictions in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s congressional testimony.

Or What?!?! It’s Arlen effin Specter. What’s he going to do, go home and make a nasty entry in his diary? Has Specter ever followed through on his disagreements with the Bush Administration?

  • …and Specter will likely blow smoke up everybody’s ass once again, coming out with a tough guy, we’re-not-going-to-stand-for-this-nonsense-another-minute stance, and then developing a linguine spine later. If he actally means to carry through with his threat, it’ll be a first.

  • I guess my first question is, why is Specter taking the lead on this? Is it to prevent criticism that this is just a partisan witch hunt? If so, it makes sense, but I have to say that I am highly suspicious of anything Specter gets involved in, because he is a master of the head fake (which is kinder than saying that when push comes to shove, he doesn’t have the courage of his convictions). I worry that while he is appearing so assertive on the rule of law, he could be advising the WH how to get Gonzales through the minefield without getting blown up – and possibly taking the administration with him.

  • Didn’t Ashcroft give the Whitehouse 24 hours to destroy their documents before the Fitzgerald investigation began?

    Oversight has indeed returned to Washington.

  • The WaPo’s Ruth Marcus’ assessment is “Short of Perjury.” Is it possible that further investigation would led to MSM-types–like Marcus, Broder, et al–to change their mind regarding “short”?

    I think their minds are made up. How can I tell? They got their fingers in their ears and are very loudly talking nonsense.

  • CB,

    Please do not tell me you are expecting anything serious from Arlen “Spineless” Specter? The “bombshell” is going to be that Gonzo was telling the truth, at least that will be “Spineless’s” interpretation.

  • Specter? Specter! Specter the corruption detecter? Oh well then, our democracy is saved. He’ll pound these liars into the ground, he’ll put the hammer down, he’ll rise to the top of the mountain and come down on them like a hail storm of frieght trains…he’ll…he’ll wimp out yet again, probably colluding with the Democracy killers right now as to how to make it look like he ‘forced’ them to come clean, and in the mean time all the mess is being shoved into a deep dark shedder somewhere, and the only thing that the administration admits is that, nothing of substance is going on, and if it is, it’s the Democrats fault. There, I feel so much better now. Go get ‘wm Mr. Specter! He’s a wolf in sheeps clothing, and the boy who cried wolf all rolled into one.

  • Ruth Marcus only makes the case many of us made here in the last week or so: impeachment proceedings for Gonzo make more sense than a prosecutorial investigation of perjury. In defending him on technicalities of a criminal perjury charge, she misses the bigger point. All of the other very-not-flattering things she says about Fredo more than provide reason to think he is not suited to remain the top law enforcement official in the United States, whether he has committed an actual criminal violation or not.

  • zeitgeist is right. Why are they even talking to this guy? Does he actually have to be tried and convicted and run out all his appeals before he’s finally considered unfit to hold the nation’s chief legal position?

    And wouldn’t Janet Reno be impeached by now?

    Jesus.

  • I wish there was a chance Specter do something other than wave this letter in the air and say, “Look – He was telling the truth after all…Move along now…move along”

  • Arlen Specter reminds me of Harvey Pell (played by Lloyd Bridges), Kane’s deputy from High Noon (heh.) Makes a big stink about how he’s a big man who is going to be the next sheriff with big boy responsibilities and then when push came to show, Pell ran away.

  • You know what’s going to happen here, as soon as the Senate leaves town for the August Break, Alberto will resign and the VERY NEXT DAY, Bush will commit a recess appoint of Harriet Miers or someone equally corrupt. There is no way, absolutely no way, that Bush, Cheney, Rove or Fielding will allow an independent attorney general to be confirmed into office. None, Nada, Zilch.

    Karl Rove for sure will not permit someone like Fitzgerald to, you know, investigate someone like Karl Rove.

  • Um, folks given Specter such a hard time… Leahy did the same thing but offered four times as much time.

    If Specter does nothing more, he’s already been tougher on AGAG than the Dems.

    If Leahy thinks giving these crooks more time strengthens his case, so be it, but if Specter makes ’em dance, we should be thankful.

    Leahy’s got our back and if Specter makes the job easier, let’s give props where we can. A bi-partisan repudiation of this corrupt regime would speak volumes in the history books of the future.

  • Specter really needs to see a shrink about his split personality disorder.

    specter (v): to oscillate rapidly between two positions without apparent rhyme or reason

  • “Um, folks given Specter such a hard time… Leahy did the same thing but offered four times as much time.”

    Leahy is following standard Congressional protocols: a witness who has testified is always give time (and a week is not unusual) to revise or correct any errors in their testimony. (Scooter Libby was given the same opportunity by Fitzgerald — he was convicted of perjury because he didn’t change his testimony even when it was made clear to him that there was considerable other testimony showing his to be false. One of the reason Rove wasn’t charge was he changed his testimony.)

    Specter on the other hand has a long history of making tough sounding statements only to completely reverse himself when it come down to backing up his statements with action.

    • Comments are closed.