Sen. Schumer: “We do have evidence” Gonzales lied under oath
SEN. SCHUMER: but, in these instances, the evidence is becoming more and more overwhelming that certain U.S. attorneys, and only certain ones, not all of them, but certain U.S. attorneys were fired because either they wouldn't prosecute a case that was politically advantageous to the White House or they were prosecuting a case that was disadvantageous to the White House. Every legal commentator, left, right, center, says you can't do that, that's the one thing you can't do.
MR. RUSSERT: Well, let's be specific about this because I want to show you what the attorney general said in January testifying before your committee. Let's watch Alberto Gonzales.
(Videotape, January 18, 2007)
MR. ALBERTO GONZALES: I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons or if it would, in any way, jeopardize an ongoing serious investigation. I just would not do it.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Do you have any evidence that a U.S. attorney was removed and that removal jeopardized an ongoing investigation?
SEN. SCHUMER: We do have evidence. In fact, four of the U.S. attorneys who were fired believe that played a role in their removal. Remember, these folks were called up all of a sudden on December 7th. They thought they were doing, doing a good job. They said, "You're not doing–you're fired." "Why?" "We can't tell you." Then they say–there's a little pressure. They say they weren't doing their job right. We get hold of the evaluations done by their peers, the judges, everyone in their district, they all get outstanding ratings. And then it comes out that in four of these instances, they were asked to pursue cases, individual cases, not a general policy, they were asked to pursue individual cases that they thought they shouldn't or they were perhaps pressured to stop. So, yes, there is evidence there in the–in the U.S. attorney's mind.
But, Tim, we don't have proof yet, conclusive, beyond a reasonable doubt proof. That's why we have to go forward with the investigation.
[ Video ]
Finnaly, some accountability?
SEN. SCHUMER: but, in these instances, the evidence is becoming more and more overwhelming that certain U.S. attorneys, and only certain ones, not all of them, but certain U.S. attorneys were fired because either they wouldn't prosecute a case that was politically advantageous to the White House or they were prosecuting a case that was disadvantageous to the White House. Every legal commentator, left, right, center, says you can't do that, that's the one thing you can't do.
MR. RUSSERT: Well, let's be specific about this because I want to show you what the attorney general said in January testifying before your committee. Let's watch Alberto Gonzales.
(Videotape, January 18, 2007)
MR. ALBERTO GONZALES: I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons or if it would, in any way, jeopardize an ongoing serious investigation. I just would not do it.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: Do you have any evidence that a U.S. attorney was removed and that removal jeopardized an ongoing investigation?
SEN. SCHUMER: We do have evidence. In fact, four of the U.S. attorneys who were fired believe that played a role in their removal. Remember, these folks were called up all of a sudden on December 7th. They thought they were doing, doing a good job. They said, "You're not doing–you're fired." "Why?" "We can't tell you." Then they say–there's a little pressure. They say they weren't doing their job right. We get hold of the evaluations done by their peers, the judges, everyone in their district, they all get outstanding ratings. And then it comes out that in four of these instances, they were asked to pursue cases, individual cases, not a general policy, they were asked to pursue individual cases that they thought they shouldn't or they were perhaps pressured to stop. So, yes, there is evidence there in the–in the U.S. attorney's mind.
But, Tim, we don't have proof yet, conclusive, beyond a reasonable doubt proof. That's why we have to go forward with the investigation.
[ Video ]
Finnaly, some accountability?
Last edited by LawJik (2007-03-19 00:18:38)