Not Just Gonzales' Perjury, But Sampson's

by emptywheel

One interesting thing about DOJ's IG's expansion of the investigation into political hirings at DOJ is that Fine appears to suspect that Kyle Sampson may have been asking political questions of career employees, as well as Monica Goodling (and two other OAG employees). That's interesting because Sampson testified, under oath, that he was not aware of any such questioning.

Here's the Schumer questioning that first alerted me, back in March, to the possibility that Goodling had politicized the hiring process.

SCHUMER: Are you aware of whether anyone at DOJ who has -- whether anyone at DOJ has asked applicants for career positions, not political positions, line positions -- questions about any of the following: their support for the president?

SAMPSON: I'm not aware of that.

SCHUMER: How they voted in any election?

SAMPSON: I don't remember. I did not participate in career hires. And I'm not aware of people doing that.

SCHUMER: You're not aware -- that's my question: Were you aware of anyone doing that?

SAMPSON: Let me be precise. I don't remember ever being aware of anything like that.

SCHUMER: OK -- whether they were registered Democrats or Republicans?

SAMPSON: I don't remember being aware of anything like that.

SCHUMER: OK -- and what their political leanings were?

SAMPSON: I don't remember anything -- I don't remember anything like that.

SCHUMER: OK. So you have no knowledge if such questions were ever asked of line-level assistant U.S. attorney applicants?

SAMPSON: Senator, I don't have any recollection of anything like that. I was not -- did not participate in the hiring of assistant U.S. attorneys.

SCHUMER: Would it be appropriate to ask such questions?

SAMPSON: I understand that assistant U.S. attorneys are career employees, and so it would not be appropriate.

SCHUMER: Thank you.

Let me just ask you a couple more on this. Did you know whether Ms. Goodling or anyone else asked such questions?

Well, let's ask -- Ms. Goodling -- so you have no knowledge that Ms. Goodling asked such questions of such people?

SAMPSON: Of career...

SCHUMER: Career, correct.

SAMPSON: ... applicants -- I don't remember any questions like that, that she would ask.

Of course, Sampson very quickly substituted, "I don't remember ever being aware of anything like that," for his, "I'm not aware of that," so maybe that'll save his ass. But he sure seemed pretty insistent that he wasn't involved in precisely the kind of activities that Fine seems to suspect he was involved in.

Comments

[barbara]

"SAMPSON: Let me be precise. I don't remember ever being aware of anything like that."

Ah, precision.

Lord love a duck. Who are these creatures?!

[Neil]

If all the DOJ employees who lied to Congress get nailed for it, that'll be progress.

Are the motivating factors behind Rove's and Gonzalez's resignations any more clear at this point?

[SaltinWound]

As I understand it, as part of the investigation, they're surveying people who were hired about the interview process. I'd be much more comfortable if they were also surveying people who were not hired.

[jdm]

FWIW, Jesselyn Radack writes at KOS today giving good reason IMO to be skeptical of OIG's ability to conduct an effective investigation. Radack, it seems, worked on "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh's defense as a lawyer for Hawkins, Delafield & Wood. Radcak filed a whistleblower claim of prosecutorial abuse and describes OIG going after her.

Given (the massive) depth of malfeasance in W's DOJ as orchestrated through the WH, personally I am more compelled to join the chorus asking for independent prosecutorial investigations. Despite occasional signs DOJ's corruption machine may be falling apart, everything else I see suggests these are momentary snapshots not indicative of the continued descent down the rabbit hole.

[phred]

SaltinWound -- the WaPo quote in the August 24 thread below says the questionnaires were sent to hundreds of job applicants, not just those hired. Do you have information to the contrary?

[dude]

I am not a lawyer. I don't understand. How could Kyle Sampson's reformulation of his answer alter anything about what he does or does not recall? "I don't remember asking questions like that" gets turned into "I don't remember being aware of asking questions like that". I don't recall an awareness. That seems to me to say: "Bad questions? Are you telling me somebody asked bad questions?"

If getting of the hook is saying Sampson is permitted to have a lack of awareness of the limits of the law or limits of doing job interviews, then I presume he is excused for being an the Incompetent-in-Charge. Is that right?

[dude]

Oh wait--I get it. Sampson is saying

"Wait a minute, Sen Schumer. You're telling me somebody asked bad questions, and I was unaware that I knew about it?. Geez, what a fool I am..."

[SaltinWound]

Phred, I have no new information. I must have misunderstood or read a reference that was more oblique. Thanks.

[phred]

SaltinWound -- no problem, just wanted to double check in case you had seen something I hadn't...