For Gonzales, More Records, and Questions
By ERIC LIPTON and DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: March 25, 2007
WASHINGTON, March 24 — An accumulating body of evidence is increasingly at odds with the statements of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that he played little role in the deliberations over the dismissal of eight United States attorneys.
~snip~
The disparities are giving Democrats in Congress a rationale to transform what started as an inquiry focused on the ouster plan itself into a much broader and perhaps even more damaging look at misleading, or at least inaccurate, statements by the key Bush administration figures involved in the effort.
“It is hard to see, given what the documents say and given what he said before, how you can square the two,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who is leading the inquiry in the Senate. “An attorney general, more than any other cabinet official, has to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”
~snip~
“That is the classic conundrum that people get into, they obfuscate, or don’t tell the whole story and that itself is what becomes the legal controversy,” Mr. Brand said. “The shifting story of what is at the bottom of these decisions on the United States attorneys is the primary reason that Congress keeps grinding away. That is always the fuel for these investigations.”
~snip~
Other documents released in recent weeks appear to contradict the claim that politics played no role in the firings. That includes a notation in one document that Mr. Rove wanted one of his former aides — a lawyer with little experience as a criminal prosecutor, but who had worked extensively with the Republican National Committee — named as the United States attorney in Arkansas, a request that required the firing of the official already in the job, who the Justice Department has since acknowledged was not removed for performance reasons.
more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/25/washington/25attorneys.html?_r=1&oref=slogin