How Mueller's notes implicate Gonzo in obstruction

by Kagro X

Plenty of buzz today surrounding the release of FBI Director Robert Mueller's (heavily redacted) notes regarding the midnight raid on John Ashcroft's hospital room. But before I get to what the buzz is and what it reveals, just one quick note on part of the WaPo coverage of the story:

Comey had precipitated the confrontation by informing the White House days earlier that the Justice Department would not approve the wiretapping program's continuation in its present form. Gonzales and Card then decided to see if they could get Ashcroft to sign a certification that it was legal.

After the meeting concluded without success, the Bush administration decided to proceed with the program anyway. But Comey, Mueller and half a dozen or so other Justice Department officials threatened to resign if it was not changed. The standoff was averted after President Bush agreed to make changes, Mueller and others have testified, but the changes have never been described.

Comey precipitates confrontation. Meeting concludes without success. "Administration" decides to proceed anyway. Comey, Mueller and others threaten to resign if changes aren't made.

OK.

Standoff averted after Bush makes changes? Standoff averted? No, standoff not averted. Standoff successful for Comey, Mueller and others. Bush loses standoff. Resignations averted. Not standoff.

Now, back to the show.

In his notes, Mueller recounts Comey's statement that Ashcroft complained to Gonzales and Card at the hospital about being "barred" from obtaining "the advice he needed" about the NSA program because of "strict compartmentalization rules" set by the White House. Although Ashcroft, as attorney general, had been fully briefed about the program, many of his senior legal advisers were not allowed to know about it, officials said.

That's incredibly important all by itself, both for obvious reasons  (they kept the AG purposefully underinformed, even as they pointed to his "authorization" as proof of legality) and not-so-obvious reasons (the "compartmentalization" of critical information was conducted outside of proper channels and designed to produce exactly this worthless facade of "authorization").

But here's another reason why it's important: It answers the question that the Justice Department's own Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) at the request, at the request of Reps. Maurice Hinchey, John Lewis, Henry Waxman and Lynne Woolsey.

The result of that investigation? Said OPR's lead counsel, H. Marshall Jarrett:

We have been unable to make any meaningful progress in our investigation because OPR has been denied security clearances for access to information about the NSA program. Beginning in January 2006, this office made a series of requests for the necessary clearances. On May 9, 2006, we were informed that our requests had been denied. Without these clearances, we cannot investigate this matter and therefore have closed our investigation.

Who denied those clearances? The president himself, according to Gonzales.

But now, we no longer need the investigation. The question was whether or not DOJ personnel acted legally, ethically and in a professionally responsible manner in rendering "legal advice" to the president regarding these surveillance activities.

Mueller answers the question for us: No. They did not.

All of which should renew focus on Bush's personal decision to nix the investigation, and Gonzales's role in advising him on it. If Gonzales, as Attorney General and chief of the Department of Justice, advised Bush to kill a DOJ investigation which would necessarily have probed (and likely implicated, if Mueller is correct) Gonzales's own activities as White House counsel, that's grounds for impeachment.

Comments

[John B.]

Great post Kargo X.

[bmaz]

I kind of thought that is exactly what both of us have been saying for quite a while now.....

[Mimikatz]

Impeachment of Gonzales, certainly. At this point I'd settle for that as the best we are going to get, and at least a line in the sand.

It should also make Congress completely rethink the FISA fix when they come back and repeal it. It probably won't, but it should.

[casual observer]

Regarding the President's semi-firewalled actions in this, I also recall that according to Comey, Mrs. Ashcroft took the call directly from the President that Card and Gonzales were coming over for a little visit. So, the President blocked the OPR investigation, and the President, based on present knowlege, was explicitly aware of the attempt to pull a work-around on the acting USAG.

[bmaz]

Mimi - You are right. But even a healthy impeachment investigation of AGAG puts a giant monkeywrench in the cogs of their machine and grinds most of it to a halt; which is absolutely imperative. Congress can't do anything about FISA at this point; that is a done deal, Bush will veto anything meaningful they do to fix it, assuming it could be gotten past the Senate in the first place.

[Sally]

casual observer, I do not think it was determined from Comey's account that Mrs. Ashcroft took the call directly from the President. I believe the call was from The Evil One Who Hides in Bushes (no pun intended).

[watercarrier4diogenes]

Mimikatz sez: "Impeachment of Gonzales, certainly. At this point I'd settle for that…"

I realize I'm "lecturing" some of my heroes here, but I really do hope you'll get past the depression/defeatism tendency and realize that ANY impeachment proceeding is very likely to produce testimony so damaging that it might even produce a dent in W's 28%, not to mention what already looks to possibly be a complete antithesis to Rove's desired permanent Repug majority.

[bmaz]

Watercarrier - Um, that is exactly what we have been saying for a very long time.

[casual observer]

Sally,

I thought Comey was questioned on this, and his testimony was that the call came from Bush. He was not present at the time of the call of course, but his testimony was Bush.

[mo2]

No, we never found out how exactly Card and Gonzales got sent. Cheney said he doesn't recall. Gonzales just said he was there on behalf of the President. Mueller's notes tell us that there was a meeting of Card and Gonzales with Cheney the day before they went to the hospital.

[earlofhuntingdon]

Nixing an investigation that Gonzales and the president understood might reveal criminal activity would seem to constitute obstruction of justice by the president and his Attorney General.

[marksb]

So, on the action front, how do we use the next two weeks to lobby our congresspeople to go full speed ahead on impeaching Gonzales? Any ideas kicking around here? Maybe a grassroots/blogroots effort in progress?
1. Do we know of any rep in Congressional leadership that is ready and committed to proceed?
2. Can we then point to that effort in requesting our reps to support?
3. Can we package the work done by EW and KX and the rest of the smartest people in the land (who happen to blog here and other key sites) and hand it all to our congressional reps?
Thanks!

[mo2]

PDF of Comey's written answers to Schumer:
http://gulcfac.typepad.com/georgetown_university_law/files/comey.schumer.pdf

[drational]

Comey never stated definitively who made the call:

SCHUMER: Do you have any idea who that call was from?

COMEY: I have some recollection that the call was from the president himself, but I don't know that for sure. It came from the White House. And it came through and the call was taken in the hospital.

It's pretty clear from Specter's questions of Gonzales from SJC 7/24/07 that Specter was trying to peel Bush away from the scandal and implicate Cheney.

[DeeLoralei in Memphis]

Marksb has a great idea. Oh BTW, Kagro great article. Seriously, if someone would compile a list of all the postings on this about AGAG, the 9 firings and other illegalities of AGAG, like the TPM with 6 lies of Gonzo, I'd print it up and take it to Steve Cohen's office on Monday. I'm gonna go volunteer since he has a DLC/Ford picked primary opponent. Oh and throw in the stuff about inherent contempt, etc.

[marksb]

I would take the correlated material to Lois Capps next week. She's one of our most progressive reps and a wonderfully nice person as well. Maybe I can wrangle a star-struck breakfast out of it...
----
And, if Comey said I have some recollection that the call was from the president himself, but I don't know that for sure. It came from the White House. that's enough to assume it did come from the president and make them prove it didn't. Time to get aggressive.

[watercarrier4diogenes]

bmaz, I'm not ready to say "Mission Accomplished" in the quest for ALL the truth, but I'm also not allowing my frustration with a bare majority in the Senate (and then only when counting on the 'Blue Dogs'), to color my thoughts on the possibility of success. I'm only asking that you and Mimikatz do the same.

[bmaz]

Watercarrier - I guess I don't understand what you are saying. You said any impeachment action would effectively lead to the truth; I agreed and noted that we have been saying exactly that for quite some time. Where is the rub?

[mo2]

Comey's Senate Judiciary Committee testimony transcript:
http://thinkprogress.org/comey-testimony/

[drational]

Can Someone also post a link to 7/24/07 Gonzo transcript? I cannot find it, but I recall from watching the testimony that Specter was really trying to split off Bush from the Hospital Melee and default toward Cheney. And this, I think, was a day or so after his Air Force one ride.

[casual observer]

So, to beat the dead horse for another furious 45 seconds, we don't actually know who sent Card and Smurf. But the only sworn testimony we have on record says it was Bush, to the best of Comey's memory. Comey is only slightly better than these other authoritarians, but at least he gave some direct answers. I certainly place more weight on his words than any of the other principals in this drama.

Here's my completely wild speculation. Bush had to make the call, because, by that time, a call from Cheney simply wouldn't have done the trick. Cheney had been arguing against Comey and Ashcroft, and by this point the conflict had risen above Cheney's pay-grade. Plus, Mrs. Ashcroft would have told Cheney to go fuck himself (i.e. she would speak to him in his own vernacular). She was probably thinking it was those WH assholes that put her man in IC to begin with . So, in order to insure entry and to ensure the best possible chance for an Ashcroft overrule of Comey, the call had to be from Bush.

[Katie Jensen]

Not that I haven't gotten excited before...but I am going to do it again. YIPEE!!! My biggest concern is that the ball is rolling before the crises hits. And even if we take off our tin foil hats we have to admit that terrorism is a lingering threat in the world even without Bushco's help. Truly, anything could happen and it would be best if those guys were under the heaviest of scrutiny when it does.

I am writing another letter to Nelson/Hagel. I just begged them to impeach gonzo yesterday...but I'll do it again with added details.

[John Lopresti]

derati, Would you settle for the 19th?

[John Lopresti]

drati, Type Pad is being funny, the following linked Gonzales appearance was the week prior, but it is the link which for some reason the TypePad server stripped out of the preceding post; Often I opt for WaPo before the actual committee site, as, in matters of immediate public interest WaPo usually publishes the Congressional Quarterly transcription before congress posts its own.
----
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/19/AR2007041902035.html?hpid=topnews

[drational]

Never mind on the Gonzo SJC transcript; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/gonzalez_transcript_072407.html
Specter was still mad at Gonzo on 7/24. His turn around came at the Jennings hearing on August 2, 2007, for which I do not have a transcript....