Transcript of Senator Russ Feingold’s Questioning of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

Audio of Senator Feingold’s questioning.

Senate Judiciary Committee – April 19, 2007

FEINGOLD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And let me just note that I hear a lot in my state about these border guard incidences as well, and look forward to whatever information is coming forward on that or hearings.

Mr. Attorney General, you've sworn an oath today and that oath carries with it certain legal consequences. But you have a duty to the American people as a public servant to tell the truth when you speak to the public in a press conference, a news interview or by publishing an op-ed piece in the newspaper, don't you?

GONZALES: Senator, I believe that when I speak to the American people and to the public that I should be truthful. And I endeavor to be truthful.

FEINGOLD: Let me then go back to the subject that Senator Kohl brought up that's of particular interest to us in Wisconsin, on the question of the case of Georgia Thompson. This was the highly publicized public corruption case which got a lot of attention in Wisconsin during much of 2006, especially since it happened during the reelection campaign of the governor of the Wisconsin.

On April 5th, right after oral argument in the case, the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ordered that Ms. Thompson be immediately released from prison and her conviction was summarily reversed. I thought the report was wrong, because it's so unusual for an appeals court to simply release somebody at that level.

The appellate judges suggested that the evidence in the case was extremely weak and said essentially the case should have never been brought.

Can you understand why many citizens of my state, as they see this U.S. attorney scandal widen, are now questioning whether the U.S. attorney in Milwaukee could have possibly brought the Thompson case for political reasons?

GONZALES: Senator, I don't -- I don't -- look at the facts here. Again, this was a career prosecutor. The charging decision was made in consultation with a then-Democratic state attorney general and a Democratic local prosecutor.

When you allege or anyone alleges -- I'm sorry, when anyone alleges that in fact there may have been politics involved in this case, what does that say to that attorney general, to that local prosecutor, to the career investigators and career prosecutors?

FEINGOLD: Let me interrupt here because time is so limited.

I didn't ask you and I'm not alleging that there were political considerations here. I'm asking can't you see how this U.S. attorney scandal, a problem that has occurred throughout the Justice Department, leads to a situation where people wonder if there are political situations -- considerations.

GONZALES: Senator, I can't speak to what may be in the minds of the people in your state. Again, I'm doing everything I can...

FEINGOLD: Yes, I can, and I can tell you this overall problem here has led to some, you know, very unfortunate thoughts about the situation that may or may not be justified.

I'm just trying to highlight what a problem this whole scandal has created.

Do you plan to have the department's Office of Professional Responsibility review the Georgia Thompson case?

GONZALES: Am I?

FEINGOLD: Yes. Are you planning to have the department's Office of Professional Responsibility review this case that I just...

GONZALES: Senator, I don't recall whether there's been action on that, but I'd be happy to consider that.

FEINGOLD: I hope you will, because I think it's very important for the reason I just gave you.

I also understand from press reports that the U.S. attorneys office in Milwaukee has provided documents to the Justice Department that are responsive to the letter that Senator Kohl and I sent, along with Chairman Leahy and other members of the committee, last week on this incident.

FEINGOLD: When can we expect a response to our letter and the production of the documents we asked for?

GONZALES: Senator, it's a recent request. I'm told that we're talking about a voluminous amount of records. We're in discussions with, I understand, committee staff and trying to do what we can to get documents up as quickly as we can.

FEINGOLD: I hope it will be soon.

Now, let me ask you about something that's been a major part of the questions of Senator Specter, Senator Kennedy, Senator Feinstein and others. And these are factual questions, so I hope they can be quick answers.

Kyle Sampson has testified that he kept you generally informed about the process of identifying U.S. attorneys who might be asked to step down. Did you ever ask him for specific information about who he was speaking to in connection with this process, or what he was doing to follow up and check out the information he received?

GONZALES: Senator, what I recall is telling Mr. Sampson, "Make sure the White House is appropriately advised, because these are political appointees," and telling him that I expected him to consult with the senior leadership at the department, people who would know best the qualifications, the performance of United States attorneys.

FEINGOLD: This is what you told him to do, but I'm asking whether you checked back with him after he did it.

GONZALES: Senator, I can't recall whether or not at the time he made the recommendations that I said "Does this -- who did you consult with and whose recommendations are these?"

I'll tell you what I understood. What I understood...

FEINGOLD: Let me continue. That is a sufficient answer: You say you don't recall having done that.

Did you at any time probe the information that Kyle Sampson provided to you, including the recommendations that he ultimately made in the seven U.S. attorneys to be fired?

GONZALES: Senator, I don't recall having specific questions or -- about specific -- I do recall that when the recommendations were made, I was not surprised to see five of the names on the list.

FEINGOLD: Did you ever talk to Deputy Attorney General Mr. McNulty about whether he was comfortable with the process that was under way?

GONZALES: With the process that was under way, I don't recall such a conversation, but afterwards, on the evening of Mr. Sampson's testimony I asked...

FEINGOLD: OK, I'm less interested in the -- I'm interested in the effects prior to.

Did you ever talk to the head of the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys or anyone else other than Mr. Sampson about whether the process was identifying the proper U.S. attorneys to be relieved of their positions?

GONZALES: What I recall were a conversation with Mr. Sampson -- that's what I recall, Senator.

FEINGOLD: Did you, at any time prior to your meeting on November 27th, 2006, ask for a report in writing on the progress of the project?

GONZALES: I don't recall asking for a report in writing.

FEINGOLD: How about when the final decisions were made at any time prior to November 27th, 2006, when you approved the firings? Were you given or did you request a written memo or report giving the justifications for each of the decisions?

GONZALES: Senator, I don't recall that occurring. Again, what I recall is Mr. Sampson presenting to me a recommendation which I understood to be the consensus recommendation of senior officials of the department.

FEINGOLD: In light of the fact that you had so little to do with the decisions, and made so little effort to understand...

GONZALES: I had everything to do with the decision. It was my decision.

FEINGOLD: Well, so little to do with the basis for the decision or why it was done, and you made so little effort to understand the reasons behind them, you really had no basis for telling the American people in your USA Today op-ed of March 7th that these U.S. attorneys had lost your confidence, did you?

GONZALES: Senator, what I understood was that the recommendations reflected the consensus judgment of the senior leadership of the department and that, therefore, the senior leadership had lost confidence in these individuals and thus the department had lost confidence.

Now, I will say, I regret the use of those words. But clearly I understood that the senior leadership, that the recommendation made to me reflected the consensus view of the senior leadership of the department, of individuals who would know better than I about the qualifications of these individuals.

FEINGOLD: Well, I recognize that you've stated this now. But you could have taken immediate steps to correct the misstatements in this op-ed. You could have sent a letter to the editor. Instead, you let what is essentially a false statement sit out there, harming the reputation of dedicated public servants.

And I think that's inexcusable.

GONZALES: Senator...

FEINGOLD: Aside from the fact that you had so little to do with the decisions and made so little effort to understand the reasons behind them, you can't really say with certainty, as you did in your testimony today, quote, "that there is no factual basis to support the allegation, as many have made, that these resignations were motivated by improper reasons," unquote. You can't really say that, can you?

GONZALES: Senator, I know the basis on which I made my decision. And I'm not aware of anything in the record, I'm not aware of any testimony which would seem to support the allegation that someone was motivated by improper reasons in making a recommendation to me.

I don't think the documents support such an allegation.

But just to be sure, I have asked the Office of Professional Responsibility to work with the Office of Inspector General to confirm this.

I want to get to the bottom of this as well, Senator, just as you do. And I want to reassure the American people that there was nothing improper about what happened here.

FEINGOLD: Well, I appreciate that sentiment at this point. But you didn't know then. And you don't know today how each of these people actually made it onto that list that you were presented with on November 27, do you?

GONZALES: Senator, I've gone back and searched the record. I've spoken with the deputy attorney general and asked him whether or not he stood by the decision. And so that is his view. That is my view.

The decision stands. It should stand. And I believe it was the right decision.

I regret the way in which it was implemented. There were obviously mistakes in the review process. I've outlined to Senator Cornyn the things that I would done differently; that, in hindsight, I think would have been more appropriate.

FEINGOLD: Well, you know, I'm obviously going to take that as a note to the question that I actually asked.

But, you know, it's pretty clear that this is a situation that at the time you had no basis to know exactly how these people came to be on the list. The fact that various justifications have been made up or concocted after the fact doesn't cut it with me.

GONZALES: Senator, if you look carefully at the documents, you can see that there were people at the Department of Justice looking at various issues with respect to U.S. attorneys. A lot of documentation with respect to immigration and gun prosecution with respect to Carol Lam. There is some documentation with respect to (inaudible) and Mr. Bogden. There's documentation with respect to the information sharing and Mr. McKay.

So there is documentation, Senator, about these reasons. There may be other evidence or information in the minds of fact witnesses that you have access to, that I don't have access to. But it's because I want to respect the integrity of this process.

FEINGOLD: There's no credibility to the notion that it was your considered judgment that those justifications were the reason for removing those people at the time. There's simply nothing in the record that demonstrates that you had a sufficient effort made to make that determination.

GONZALES: Senator, I thought I had a good process in place. I think I'm justified in relying upon the judgment of the senior leadership of the Department of Justice. I think I'm justified in relying upon the people who know a lot more about the qualifications and performance of United States attorneys, and accepting that recommendation.

I did have in my mind, at least information -- or reasons with respect to five of these individuals. I was not surprised that they were recommended to me based upon my knowledge.

FEINGOLD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the extra time.