Battle Lines
by emptywheel

Oh this is good.

Michael Battle, the guy who got to fire a bunch of very professional US Attorneys (and who subsequently quit because, stories said, he regretted the whole thing), told the Judiciary Committees that several of the Gonzales 8 were fired for no reason.

[Battle] told Congress that several of the prosecutors had no performance problems and that a memo on the firings was distributed at a Nov. 27 meeting attended by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, a Democratic senator said yesterday.

And note how this detail is getting to the press? Chuck Schumer is repeating the supposedly confidential briefings ... on the record.

QUOTE
Battle's statements, relayed to reporters yesterday by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), came as Gonzales prepares for a make-or-break appearance on Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

[snip]

Battle told investigators that he was "not aware of performance problems with respect to several" of the prosecutors when he called to fire them, Schumer said in a conference call with reporters yesterday.


This is a nice touch. Though there was an unspoken understanding no one would mention the USAs who weren't fired, Schumer pressured Kyle Sampson to reveal those names in his statement. And now, rather than getting one of his staffers in trouble for an anonymous leak, Schumer's going to go on the record and reveal the testimony which Abu G has labeled as "confidential." Not in DC, Abu G.

There are two more details of note. First, Battle disputes Gonzales' (and Sampson's claim that there was no paperwork handed out at the fateful November 27 meeting.

QUOTE
Schumer said Battle also contradicted Gonzales's assertion at a March 13 news conference that he had not seen any documents or participated in any discussions about the firings. A memo related to the dismissals was passed out at a Nov. 27 meeting attended by Gonzales and others, Battle told investigators.

"Mike Battle remembers a memo was distributed," Schumer said.
Gosh. I've read through all the document dumps, and I don't remember such a memo. Do you?

And the article reveals that only four DOJ officials have testified, which includes Kyle Sampson coming in for seconds.

QUOTE
The statements by Battle, who left his job last month, are the first details to emerge from more than 20 hours of interviews with four top Gonzales aides over the past two weeks by staff members on the House and Senate Judiciary committees. The last of those interviews was conducted yesterday with Sampson, ...


This means that--contrary to Abu G's claim that everyone from DOJ was forthcoming--two people in addition to Monica "Five for Freedom" have not testified. Here was the original list:

QUOTE
Paul McNulty (though his Senate appearance might count?)
William Moschella (the Senate voted to subpoena him on Thursday)
Michael Elston (testified two weeks ago)
William Mercer
David Margolis
Monica Goodling (announced she'd take the Fifth)
Michael Battle (testified per this article)
Kyle Sampson (testified before the Senate and again yesterday)


So who is it, Abu G? William Mercer? David Margolis? Thus far, the Senate has only been allowed to speak to four, maybe five, of the eight people people at the center of this scandal. That doesn't seem very forthcoming.

I'm getting the feeling that Schumer has been preparing as diligently as Gonzales for the last two weeks.
Trackback