The frustrations of Senate Democrats have begun to manifest themselves in actions rather than
words, as four Senate Democrats have requested a perjury probe of
embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales’s testimony
regarding a hospital room confrontation with his predecessor, John
Ashcroft, was contradicted by FBI Director Robert Mueller.
But the perjury issue is trickier than a simple senatorial
recommendation to launch an investigation. It is the solicitor
general, not Congress, who would have the authority to appoint a
special counsel to investigate. And the solicitor general is a
member of the Bush administration.
Historically, prying the truth from Gonzales has been an
unfruitful venture. Gonzales, like most in the Bush Administration,
has never been one to sit willingly for a congressional
disquisition.
Tuesday’s hearing on “Oversight of the Department of Justice”
played similarly, peppered throughout with “do not recalls,”
factual discrepancies, and apparent contradictions. So unsatisfied
were committee Democrats with Gonzales’s performance that Russ
Feingold (D-WI) instructed Gonzales to read and re-read his prior
testimonies to iron out all discrepancies before appearing before
the committee again. The committee gave Gonzales eight days to
correct, clarify, or otherwise amend his testimony.
“I’ve never seen this type of avoidance before,” said Arlen
Specter (R-PA), the lone Republican to remain for the duration of
the hearing. “I think we have to pursue this.”
Pursue it, the Democrats have. And now the success of the
perjury probe against Gonzales might hang on Specter, ranking
member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a man whose support would
give the air of bipartisan legitimacy to a perjury probe that might
be written off as “political” otherwise.
Speaking with a Judiciary Committee spokesperson after
Gonzales’s Tuesday hearing, it was clear that Senate Democrats
wanted to send a stronger message to Gonzales than they could by
following normal procedures. Typically, after a hearing,
legislators write follow-up questions and testifiers have a chance
to clarify their answers. That is the procedure, at least, when
senators feel there is a basis of truth in the hearings.
But Senate Democrats are saying the days when they could “trust,
but verify” Gonzales’s words have long passed. And they are tired
of waiting. One could sense that things were different during
Tuesday’s hearing on Oversight at the Justice Department.
“You have come here seeking our trust,” said Chairman Patrick
Leahy (D-VT), “but you have already lost mine.” Said Feingold,
“Your testimony has been misleading, at best.” Even ranking member
Specter joined the fray, telling Gonzales that morale at the
Department of Justice fell to an all-time low under his watch, and
proclaiming it “difficult” to take seriously Gonzales’s
reassurances that he is addressing the problem.
Such words have been par for the course since Gonzales took over
as attorney general in 2005. It is the actions behind the words
that have changed dramatically. This puts the Bush White House in a
tough position, whereby it can take one of two choices. Bush can
require Gonzales to testify candidly, on the record, under oath. Or
the president can instruct Solicitor General Clement to reject a
follow-up on the perjury probe, wave the banner of executive
privilege, and right the battle through the media. Advantage,
Democrats.
But the law-and-order issue can surely be overplayed. If
Democrats come to be seen as vengeful, if their actions are
perceived as “political,” it is their credibility, not Gonzales’s,
that would come into question. And if all the public proclamations
about subpoenas and perjury bears no tangible fruit, Democrats
would lose the one thing they have going for them — the political
high ground to demand accountability from the Bush Administration.
In that case, advantage, Republicans.
Specter, for his part, has given mixed signals. In some cases,
he has begun to eat away at the attacks on Gonzales, today accusing
his peers of “politicizing” the perjury probe. “There’s a little
bit of Don Quixote, everybody’s running off in different
directions,” Specter is quoted in the Post. Yet Specter
also sharply criticized the administration’s view of
executive power while aboard Air Force One yesterday.
This is the same Arlen Specter that said “I do not find your
testimony credible” to Gonzales with cameras running, the same
Specter that ominously referred to the need to “pursue” Gonzales’s
alleged inconsistencies. This is the same Arlen Specter who might
be the most important man in the process, in the months ahead.
If Specter refuses to push for the perjury probe — as his early
remarks on the Quixotic nature of the probe indicate — we could
end up right back where we started: with an unaccountable attorney
general and a Congress powerless to act.
