OIG Report May Indicate Gonzales Perjury

[L. Coyote]

OIG Report May Indicate Gonzales Perjury
By Kate Klonick - September 3, 2008 - http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/oig_report_implies_gonzales_pe.php


We noted yesterday that the Justice Department Office of the Inspector General issued a report on the found that former Attorney Gen. Alberto Gonzales had mishandled classified documents during his time in office -- and that the DOJ had decided not to press charges.

But that doesn't seem to be half as bad as what CQ Politics' Jeff Stein dug up -- fact checking Gonzales' testimony to investigators with . . . well, the report's own stipulated facts.

From CQ Politics' SpyTalk:

But the IG report shows that Gonzales did more than "mishandle" his notes, which included operational details on what he himself, somewhat ironically, called -- after it had leaked -- "one of the most highly protected in the United States ... a very, very secretive, protected program," and correspondence between congressional Intelligence Committee leaders and CIA chief Gen. Michael Hayden.

In a statement that doesn't pass the laugh test, Gonzales told IG investigators he didn't know the documents were secret. .....

[L. Coyote]

1. HORTON: "But there is a bombshell lurking in the report."

Update on the Gonzales Report
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/09/hbc-90003493

.....

It appears that some of the Gonzales notes at the focus of the query relate to a briefing of the “Gang of Eight”—Congressional leadership figures, including Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, and Jay Rockefeller on the Democratic side—about surveillance procedures. This has been a focus of some recent sharp criticism within Congress as Republican leaders imply that the Democrats knew of and at least implicitly approved the Administration’s tactics in overriding the limitations on domestic surveillance put in place by the FISA statute. The Gonzales notes will therefore be of some historical interest as records of the depth of the briefing that was given.

The report also demonstrates a rather curious defense mounted for Gonzales by his attorney, George Terwilliger, a man whose name repeatedly figured on the short list approved by movement conservatives to succeed Gonzales. Terwilliger appears to have taken aim at former Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey, arguing that he was an interloper at the hospital bedside conversation that Gonzales conducted with Ashcroft, at which Andrew Card and Mrs. Ashcroft were also present. The argument can’t work because Comey was the acting Attorney General at that point, as Ashcroft had turned over his duties to him on leaving for surgery. Moreover, Comey’s own testimony suggested he had been handling the very issues that Gonzales discussed with Ashcroft and had come out against the approvals that Gonzales sought. So why does Terwilliger make this argument? Clearly Gonzales felt particularly threatened by some evidence that Comey gave. It may be a while before we get to know the full scope of this relationship, but I suspect there is much more to this story.

There is a thematic consistency in Gonzales’s testimony, and it is forgetfulness. Just as he could not remember the contents of discussions about firing DOJ staffers and U.S. attorneys, particularly when the White House was involved, he doesn’t seem to remember anything much about the FISA controversy, the conflict with senior DOJ officials who were so moved by it that they threatened resignation, or what he did with highly classified documents in his possession. Maybe they were in his unlocked briefcase, maybe he took them home with him, maybe he put them in a safe. It’s all a blur, he says. One thing is clear: he didn’t pay it much mind.

But there is a bombshell lurking in the report. Gonzales testified that he did not recall the compartmentalized security classification given to certain documents .......

[crickets]

2. I hope it's a big one. -nt

[L. Coyote]

3. Has Fredo Dodged a Bullet?

September 2 - http://harpers.org/archive/2008/09/hbc-90003489
Has Fredo Dodged a Bullet?

Department of Justice Inspector General Glenn Fine has released another report, this one looking into allegations that former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales mishandled classified materials. ... There will be no recommendation of criminal action.

Carrie Johnson reports: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090102423.html

The Justice Department’s inspector general has concluded that Gonzales should have taken precautions to safeguard the materials, related to the government’s warrantless wiretapping program and other eavesdropping initiatives .... s the crown jewel of the government’s surveillance operations—matters so secret that extraordinary measures are necessary to protect against disclosure ....

The Justice Department apparently considers that no harm was done by the violations and that no disciplinary action should be taken. That’s a self-serving conclusion. Curiously, when the violations involve members of the opposition political party, the Justice Department takes a very different approach to the question. Ask former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger. He committed the exact offense that Gonzales committed: removing classified documents in violation of protocols governing their storage. In his case, too, no disclosures were made to unauthorized persons and the national security was in no way compromised. Indeed, the papers that Berger mishandled were not really terribly sensitive. So what did the Justice Department do? Berger was prosecuted, convicted of a misdemeanor, and lost his law license.