the meeting…

Posted on Thursday 3 May 2007

And so they came to March 2006. Things were spinning out of hand. William Moschella was being called to testify in a Senate Committee. Gonzales had already been. The Press was buzzing like a hive of bees. There was a newly formed Senate Judiciary Committee: "Preserving Prosecutorial Independence: Is the Department of Justice Politicizing the Hiring and Firing of U.S. Attorneys?" On Monday, March 5, 2006, William Kelly, Assistant White House Counsel emailed Kyle Sampson after lunch for a White House meeting that day:

They settled on five pm and carpooled over to the White House. I presume they met with Fred Fielding, Harriet Miers’ replacement as White House Counsel, William Kelly, and who else? Maybe Karl Rove? After that meeting, the only emails I know about involving Kyle Sampson have been withheld as privileged:

On Tuesday,  William Moschella, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, testified, along with the fired Attorneys. On Wednesday, it looks like they spent the day trying to figure out what to do about being called by the Senate Judiciary’s Committee’s long-named Subcommittee. On Thursday, they were checking with Alberto Gozales about what documents he’d agreed to send to the Subcommittee. At some point that week, they were apparently calling Senator Specter, a member of that Subcommittee, and working on what they were going to say to him.

I gather things didn’t go so well, because on the following Monday [March 12th], Kyle Sampson, Alberto Gonzales’ Chief of Staff, resigned [the day before the first document dump]. Monica Goodling, Special Counsel to the Attorney General and White House Liason, stayed around until March 23rd, then went on leave, resigning on April 6th. Michael Battle, Director of the Executive Office of the U.S. Attorneys, was apparently already going or gone. Somewhere in there, Michael Elston, Chief of Staff to the Deputy Attorney General, went on extended leave. Add in Harriet Miers, White House Counsel, who left on January 31st and that makes five of the principles involved in the firings out of there like a blue streak.

Must’ve been one hell of a meeting on March 5th….

UPDATE: from McClatchy via TPM:

According to a congressional aide, McNulty said he attended a White House meeting with Karl Rove, President Bush’s top political adviser, and other officials on March 5, the day before McNulty’s deputy William Moschella was to testify to Congress about the firings.

White House officials told the Justice Department group that they needed to agree on clear reasons why each prosecutor was fired and explain them to Congress, McNulty said, according to the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the transcript of McNulty’s interview hasn’t been made public.

McNulty said that White House officials never revealed during the meeting that they’d been discussing plans to replace some prosecutors with Gonzales aides, the congressional aide said.

McNulty recalled feeling disturbed and concerned when he found out days later that the White House had been involved, the congressional aide said. McNulty considered the extent of White House coordination to be "extremely problematic."

A Justice Department spokesman declined comment. A White House spokesman said the meeting wasn’t unusual. "We have meetings all the time," said Tony Fratto, who declined to say who attended the March 5 meeting.
  1.  
    joyhollywood
    May 3, 2007 | 8:59 PM
     

    While you are trying to get to the bottom of this US Attorneys mess there are GOP candidates who are having a grand old time at their first debate. These are wonderful times you see. One of the questions asked is if they think Libby should be pardoned. The person who got my Irish up was Romney. He thought Fiztgerald was totally wrong to charge him etc. Of course there is little mention about outing a covert CIA agent and that the reason for his lying for Cheney was the chief reason for us going to war in the first place. We can’t forget the mushroom cloud that scared everybody. they all seem so shallow and lacking of character. I suppose there will be drinks and backslapping when it’s all over. I think the media ought to join them since they’re all good buddies. I’m sorry to be such a downer here but I needed to type this to some like minded people. I don’t think we’re having such a great time watching the Iraq war casualty go up and up.

  2.  
    May 3, 2007 | 10:30 PM
     

    Actually, you caught me. I was hiding from those debates because I just couldn’t stand to watch. I’d rather read through the email dumps or the blogs and dream of a day when these people might be brought under control. I wish the country were less polarized, but we found out [in 2000 and 2004] what happens when we don’t fight back. I just read about the debates on The Huffington Post. It was worse than I thought. They’re going to try to play to that kind of prejudice and malarkey again in 2008. Unbelievable…

  3.  
    peg
    May 4, 2007 | 12:18 AM
     

    the debate was pretty frightening, imo. if i were a republican, i would have a hard time deciding who to vote for… i guess i’ll ask my Hannity-Boortz-loving relatives.

    i’m sure looking forward to what Olbermann will say on Countdown.

  4.  
    Abby's mom
    May 4, 2007 | 5:57 AM
     

    Thanks to those of you who watched. We couldn’t stand it here.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.