I don't know what to make of this Press Release from John Conyers!

[KoKo]

On read it's very disappointing. I'm trying to think of the "strategy" behind this...but I'm not coming up with anything. :-(

------------


Fof Immediate Release
3/29/2007

Conyers Announces Justice Department Deal to Begin Staff Interviews

For Immediate Release Contact: Jonathan Godfrey(202) 226-6888
March 29, 2007 Melanie Roussell(202) 226-5543

(Washington, DC)- Today, House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr. announced an agreement with the Justice Department (DoJ) to start interviewing Justice staffers who may have been involved in the recent mass firing of U.S. Attorneys. Following a series of phone and written negotiations, DoJ agreed to make at least eight current and former employees available for transcribed interviews with House and Senate Democrat and Republican investigators, starting tomorrow at 10 A.M. with Michael Elston, Chief of Staff to the Deputy Attorney General.

"The ability to move forward with our investigation with the Justice Department's cooperation is a big step," Conyers said. "If we are going to get to the bottom of this, we must talk to those involved in guiding the decision-making process. This agreement, which involves on the record interviews in advance of possible hearings, helps bring us down that path. We still anxiously await further negotiation with the White House."

Conyers and other congressional leaders have been involved in negotiations with the DoJ for weeks regarding interviews with key individuals involved in the US Attorney matter, including: Michael Elston, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, Associate Deputy Attorney General David Margolis, Michael Battle, former Director of the Office of U.S. Attorneys, Monica Goodling, Special Counsel to the Attorney General and White House Liaison, William Mercer, U.S. Attorney for Montana and Acting Associate Attorney General, and William Moschella, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General. Interviews for the other DoJ employees have not yet been scheduled but the Justice Department has agreed to make those individuals available. Goodling has already announced that she will invoke her Fifth Amendment rights when asked any questions regarding this investigation.

To confirm the agreement, Conyers and the other leaders agreed that investigators would keep the content of the interviews confidential pending consultation with Department officials.

He added, "While we are encouraged by this agreement, we still look forward to resolving the issue of redacted and withheld documents that the Department has not yet produced. I am hopeful we can achieve progress on that important issue very soon as well."

The Judiciary Committee has previously authorized subpoenas for interviews with White House staff and documents, as well as the redacted and withheld documents from the Justice Department. Conyers has not issued any subpoenas, pending further discussions with the White House and the Justice Department.

Elston will meet with investigators in the House Judiciary Committee office, 2138 Rayburn House Office Building, tomorrow at 10 A.M. The full text of the Department's letter to Conyers is available at: http://www.judiciary.house.gov.

##110-JUD-020807##

http://judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=794

[robinlynne]

1. He is getting on the record interviews. This info can be used to bring down gonzales.

This is a good thing.

[KoKo]

3. But, if it's not "under oath" what good does it do? These people are arrogant

and if they are anything like the "kids" like Sampson and Goodling (who graduated from Pat Robertson's law school in 1999) and who never tried a case but were put in there as good Young Repugs fresh out of law school...they will LIE to support those who hired them.

This is very disappointing. I'm trying to understand it...but just can't get the logic...unless Conyers already has info that is so damaging he can catch them in their lies. And, that would be a stretch...that he could have that kind of info at hand. :shrug:

[originalpckelly]

6. Again, so long as there is a transcript it's OK. The law punishing...

perjury and the law punishing false statements not under oath to the government, are the same, five years.

[robinlynne]

8. dont need under oath. need the official transcript, which he got.

[seafan]

2. I read somewhere here today that Conyers also said that these interviews were

just "a first step and not in lieu of full hearings." There will be a transcript, but just not on camera.

I wouldn't worry too much for now.

[KoKo]

4. okay....hopefully they are just small fish and he will get something

out of them...but I'm still worried.

[eleny]

5. And we can pray for leaks

Even if it is Conyers' committee. I'll still hope for leaks.

[Gold Metal Flake]

7. I'm gonna trust John Conyers.

I'm nervous, but I'm not in his business. He knows what he is doing, I believe. grimace.gif

[DCKit]

9. Let the little fishies go and wait until you've got enough information

to take care of the sharks, but good.

[peacetalksforall]

10. Looks like they all negotiated after all. Three parts:

1. Sampson live and on air
2. Others private and cofidential with transcriptions, plus documents
3. Gonzales - April 17