Waxman Letter To Mukasey On Plame Investigation

Office of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA)   |   December 3, 2007 11:19 AM


stumbleupon :Waxman Letter To Mukasey On Plame Investigation   digg: Waxman Letter To Mukasey On Plame Investigation   reddit: Waxman Letter To Mukasey On Plame Investigation   del.icio.us: Waxman Letter To Mukasey On Plame Investigation

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

I am writing to seek your assistance in the Oversight Committee's investigation into the circumstances surrounding the leak of the covert identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. As the recent disclosure from former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan underscores, there remain many unanswered questions surrounding this incident and the involvement of the President, the Vice President, and other senior White House officials in the security breach and the White House response.

The Special Counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, has been cooperating with the Committee's investigation. Over the summer, Mr. Fitzgerald agreed to provide relevant documents to the Committee, including records of interviews with senior White House officials. Unfortunately, the White House has been blocking Mr. Fitzgerald from providing key documents to the Committee.

I hope you will not accede to the White House objections. During the Clinton Administration, your predecessor, Janet Reno, made an independent judgment and provided numerous FBI interview reports to the Committee, including reports of interviews with President Clinton, Vice President Gore, and three White House Chiefs of Staff. I have been informed that Attorney General Reno neither sought nor obtained White House consent before providing these interview records to the Committee. I believe the Justice Department should exercise the same independence in this case.

I have been careful in my dealings with Special Counsel Fitzgerald to narrow the Committee's request to documents that would not infringe on his prosecutorial independence or intrude upon grand jury secrecy. Before the Committee requested any documents, my staff, Justice Department staff, and Mr. Fitzgerald's staff discussed the types of documents that could be properly provided to the Committee. Mr. Fitzgerald's staff agreed that the Committee's request was appropriate and has already produced a number of the requested documents relating to CIA and State Department officials and other individuals. To date, however, Mr. Fitzgerald has been frustrated in his attempts to transmit documents relating to White House officials to the Committee.

Equal application of the law means that there should not be one standard applied by the Justice Department to congressional investigations of Democratic administrations and another standard applied to congressional investigations of Republican administrations. I ask that you personally look into this matter and authorize the production of the documents to the Committee without any further delay.

Background

On March 16, 2007, the Committee held a hearing to examine the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson's covert identity. Witnesses at the hearing included Ms. Wilson; James Knodell, the Director of the White House Security Office; and William Leonard, the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office at the National Archives. As I announced in my opening statement at the hearing, the purpose of the Committee's inquiry is to examine three questions:

(1) How did such a serious violation of our national security occur? (2) Did the White House take the appropriate investigative and disciplinary steps after the breach occurred? And (3) what changes in White House procedures are necessary to prevent future violations of our national security from continuing?

Following the hearing, my staff engaged in discussions with Justice Department officials representing Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Fitzgerald's staff to determine an appropriate way for Mr. Fitzgerald to assist the Committee's inquiry without jeopardizing Mr. Fitzgerald's prosecutorial independence or grand jury secrecy. These discussions resulted in a formal document request that I sent to Mr. Fitzgerald on July 16, 2007, a copy of which is enclosed. Both the Justice Department and Mr. Fitzgerald's staff agreed that the final document request was reasonable and appropriate.

This document request sought seven categories of documents. Some of the requests, such as the request for "[d]ocuments relating to the existence or systems at the White House to ensure that classified information would be protected," require the Special Counsel to conduct document searches. Other requests asked for enumerated documents. One important request sought:

Transcripts, reports, notes, and other documents relating to any interviews outside the presence of the grand jury of any of the following individuals:

a. President George W. Bush

b. Vice President Dick Cheney

c. Andrew Card

d. Stephen Hadley

e. Karl Rove

f. Dan Bartlett

g. Scott McClellan

Since the Committee's letter was sent on July 16, Mr. Fitzgerald and his staff have cooperated with the Committee's investigation and have produced a number of responsive documents to the Committee. Among the documents that Mr. Fitzgerald has produced to the Committee are "FBI 302 reports" of interviews with CIA and State Department officials and other individuals.

Production of Records of White House Interviews

According to a Justice Department official, Mr. Fitzgerald has also designated for production to the Committee reports of interviews of certain White House officials. However, to date, four months after the Committee's request, he has been unable to produce these documents to the Committee because the White House has not consented to their production. Committee staff has asked Justice Department staff to provide, but has not received, a date by which the White House will determine whether it will allow Mr. Fitzgerald to produce the documents.

There is no legitimate basis for the withholding of these documents. Mr. Fitzgerald has apparently determined that these documents can be produced to the Committee without infringing on his prosecutorial independence or violating the rules of grand jury secrecy. As records of statements made by White House officials to federal investigators, outside the framework of presidential decision-making, the documents could not be subject to a valid claim of executive privilege.

Moreover, there is direct precedent for the production of these records to the Committee. During the Clinton Administration, the Justice Department provided the Committee with dozens of FBI 302 reports of interviews with White House officials. No White House official -- including the President and the Vice President -- was exempted from the production. Among the White House officials whose FBI 302 reports were provided to the Committee were:

· President Clinton

· Vice President Gore

· Erskine Bowles (Chief of Staff to the President)

· Mack McLarty (Chief of Staff to the President)

· Leon Panetta (Chief of Staff to the President)

· Roy Neel (Chief of Staff to the Vice President)

· Jack Quinn (Counsel to the President)

· Steven Ricchetti (Deputy Chief of Staff to the President)

· Bruce Lindsey (Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President)

· Harold Ickes (Assistant to the President)

· Doug Sosnik (Assistant to the President)

· Cheryl Mills (Deputy Counsel to the President)

In the case of the Clinton Administration interview records, former Attorney General Janet Reno made her own determination that they were relevant to the Committee's inquiries and produced them to the Committee. I understand that she neither requested nor received White House approval before transmitting the documents.

Request for Assistance

The Committee is conducting a vitally important inquiry into whether the White House followed the required safeguards in protecting Ms. Wilson's identity and responding to an exceptionally serious breach of national security. As Mr. McClellan, the former White House Press Secretary, now asserts:

I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the Vice President, the President's chief of staff and the President himself.

Because of the implications of Mr. McClellan's assertions, I am asking for your personal assistance in obtaining the documents being withheld by the White House. These documents are directly relevant to the Committee's investigation, and they have been determined by Mr. Fitzgerald to be appropriate for release to the Committee. I believe they should be provided to the Committee without any additional delay and without redactions or other limitations dictated by the White House.

I recognize that President Bush and his counsel may not want this information provided to Congress. But the role of the Attorney General is to administer the laws with impartiality. The Justice Department provided the exact same information to Congress during the Clinton Administration. There is no special standard for President Bush that exempts him and his senior advisors from responsible congressional oversight.

If you have any questions regarding my request, please contact me personally or ask your staff to contact David Rapallo or Theodore Chuang of the Committee staff at (202) 225-5420.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman
Chairman

Comments for this post are now closed

 
Comments
12
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

_IF_ Mukasey refuses to grant Waxman's request, THEN we should push Nancy HARD - and every other possible outlet to let ALL the people know: Impeachment Now.

If, on the other hand, Mukasey complies, perhaps the evidence will lead the way to impeachment all on its own and Nancy will finally see the light.

We need this one - and we need it now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 PM on 12/06/2007

If the next president is also a Republican, will he pardon Bush for any crimes committed while President?
That should be a question asked of all of the Republicans trying to become their party's candidate for president.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:49 AM on 12/04/2007

There is no way a con man like GW Bush will ever permit his own, or his lackies', words to hang him if he can avoid it. He will obstruct till a new president is elected and then he will destroy any and all documents that might convict him. At that point it will be moot because the GOP will fight tooth and nail to avoid his being charged with a felony by any grand jury. Such a charge, successfully brought in by a grand jury, would destroy the party and end any hope of anyone calling himself a republican being elected to national office.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:40 PM on 12/03/2007

The public and the world wait with baited breath the announcement of the decision of Mukasey. Perhaps nothing is more important than this for the rest of the century. Will he continue to assist in enabling and completing the destruction of our Constitutional form of government? . . . Or will he give us hope that each person is responsible to the law and held to account under our Constitution, not just the weak and powerless, but the rich, the mighty, and most especially the pResident and his sycophantic minions?

The confirmation hearings left us believing that he would sell our grand experiment in freedom down the river, when he took a pass on answering the question about torture. Now that he is installed and has the power, will he prove his independence or will he prove to be just another atta-boy seeking king-maker, allowing the people, of the world really, to become once again subjects of kings instead of masters of their own fate? For as George becomes master, the last best hope for democracy becomes a kingdom, enslaving subjects to the will of the pResident, practicing extreme rendition against the law, destroying any intelligence networks which uncover facts inconvenient to his will, and ensuring that those who have no reason aligned to the pResident's will to know what is going on, can have no chance to discover the truth.

There are two doors here. Behind one is the truth, behind the other is the completion of the rise of fascism in the United States.

Pick the first door Mukasey!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:43 PM on 12/03/2007

This is the independence test for our new Attorney General. Reno provided everything the Republican Congress wanted to know, and now we have Republicans rejecting everything Congress wants to know.

If he doesn't do it, he isn't indpendent, so the only way to determine what was done is TO IMPEACH CHENEY AND BUSH. In that case, no EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE CAN BE ALLEGED OR CLAIMED.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:40 PM on 12/03/2007

King George I "The Arrogant"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:33 PM on 12/03/2007

Acid test for Mukasey. If he stonewalls, the question will be, impeachment for him as well? There are no legal grounds for him to NOT force the administration to stand aside and allow the process to continue.

As has been stated in so many forums including HuffPo, only complicit liars will attempt to obstruct any panel from finding the truth in this matter. The obstruction itself is damning...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:33 PM on 12/03/2007
photo

I can only hope Chairman Waxman includes looking at President Bush's comments of October 7, 2003, when he said,

"I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is." He added, "This is a large administration and there are a lot of senior officials."

That sure looks like a wink to me. And a wink, in this context, constitutes Obstruction of Justice.

The Question Authority
vidhardt.blogspot.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:59 PM on 12/03/2007

Mr, Waxman,
Never give up, never yield.

The layer upon layer of the deception onion must be peeled back. For the truth is always self evident.
Therefore up rooting this weed, that is systematically eroding at the very fabric of our nations Contitution, it must be diligently attended to less it continue to dissimate the foundation of the nation that has allowed liberty to build for over 200 years.

The children that are our future must be bequithed more than a rag of slight resemblance to an idea that has be called democracy. They must have solid ground to stand on and roof to guard against forces that would destroy our nation by lies, deception and selfish greed and arrogance in our leaders.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 PM on 12/03/2007

I watched the Waxman hearings in question. This is a ticking time bomb for the Bush Administration, and you can bet that the White House will fight tooth and nail to avoid sending those transcripts to Waxman. The main point made when James Knodell testified was that although he was the chief of White House Security at the time of the Plame leak, he was NEVER asked to open an investigatory file on the matter by Bush or anyone else. There is no way to square his inaction with Bush's contemporaneous statements that he was going to get to the "bottom" of the leak. Bush WAS the bottom of the leak; that was his problem. I have thought for a long time this Plame matter could yet be Bush's Waterloo. He obviously knew about the origins of the leak from the outset, and his carefully orchestrated public statements in the summer and fall of 2003 were part of a coverup. I imagine that Fitzgerald's transcripts contain many examples of admissions that are impossible to reconcile with Bush's public statements, and if they come to light, Bush is going to have a huge problem, and he knows it. Waxman will not let up; this will have to be fought in federal court, and Bush is hoping he can leave office voluntarily before the case can be resolved. It's too bad the MSM has done such a terrible job covering this matter. It is Bush's Watergate, but they can't be bothered.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 PM on 12/03/2007

What do these people have to hide? I think the answer is self-evident, but I still look forward to finding out. Keep it up, Mr. Waxman.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:15 PM on 12/03/2007
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect