Posted on 04/04/2007 3:59:15 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - A senior Justice Department aide refused Wednesday to submit to a private interview with a House committee investigating the firings of eight U.S. attorneys.
Her lawyers accused Democrats of behaving like the notorious Sen. Joseph McCarthy to intimidate her.
Lawyers for Monica Goodling, who has said she would assert her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to avoid appearing at congressional hearings, told the House Judiciary Committee she would neither testify publicly nor submit to private questioning about the firings.
Goodling was senior counsel to embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and was the department's White House liaison before she took a leave last month amid the uproar over the prosecutors' ousters. A Senate panel has authorized a subpoena for her, but none has been issued.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich., asked Tuesday that Goodling submit to a closed-door interview on the matter, saying she had nothing to fear if she told the truth.
In a Wednesday letter responding to that request, her lawyers said her decision not to testify "can in no way be interpreted to suggest that Ms. Goodling herself participated in any criminal activity."
Conyers' and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record)'s "recent suggestions to the contrary are unfortunately reminiscent of Senator Joseph McCarthy, who infamously labeled those who asserted their constitutional right to remain silent before his committee 'Fifth Amendment Communists,'" wrote the lawyers, John Dowd and Jeffrey King.
A spokesman for Conyers' panel said in a written statement that the chairman had hoped offering Goodling a private interview could spare her a public appearance.
"It is unfortunate that Mr. Dowd has injected such bizarre and overheated rhetoric into a good faith exchange about whether Ms. Goodling would voluntarily agree to be interviewed behind closed doors by the committee," the statement said.
"It is also disappointing, in light of earlier pledges of cooperation, that the Justice Department stands idly by while a staff member, still on its payroll, refuses to cooperate with Congress," the spokesman added.
Leahy, D-Vt., had no immediate response to the letter.
Meanwhile, Gonzales was hunkered down at the Justice Department, preparing for two Senate hearings over the next two weeks that could determine whether he survives calls for his ouster from both Democrats and Republicans.
Goodling's lawyers warned Conyers against compelling their client to appear at a public hearing knowing of her intention to invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer questions.
"(I)t would be difficult to imagine a more fundamental abrogation of this committee's duty to uphold the Constitution than to punish those who seek its protection," the letter said.
Her lawyers have said congressional attempts to get Goodling to testify are a perjury trap for her. They cite charges that Goodling misled Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty before he testified to Congress about the ousters, causing him to give an incomplete and possibly inaccurate account.
___
Associated Press Writer Lara Jakes Jordan contributed to this report.
On the Net:
House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/
Senate Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.senate.gov/
I love seeing Sen.Joseph McCarthy’s brought up by dems and Republicans,it shows that neither party is a student of history.
Are there any lawyers who can clarify this for me?
I have heard that it is not appropriate for a witness to ‘plead the 5th’ for fear that he or she _may_ commit (or be accused of committing) a crime while testifying. That is to say, the purpose of the 5th amendment is to protect people who may have committed crimes in the past from being forced to reveal those crimes on the stand.
If anyone could ‘plead the 5th’ for fear that the actual act of testifying may cause them to be charged with perjury, then why should anybody testify in any court of law anywhere in the United States? Wouldn’t the entire notion of a subpoena become entirely useless?
Perhaps a Freeper who has been to law school may be able to shed some light...
Scum like Conyers and Leahy and Schumer and Waxfong make Joe McCarthy look like a saint.
Scum like Conyers and Leahy and Schumer and Waxfong make Joe McCarthy look like a saint.
—
worthy of repeating
BumP
What happens if your issued a subpoena and don't show up?
Nothing,Ha!
Although, I will not call Joe McCarthy a saint, he was right as is demonstrated by Scum like Conyers and Leahy and Schumer and Waxfong
for fear that he or she _may_ commit (or be accused of committing) a crime while testifying.....Scooter Libby testified to THE BEST OF HIS RECOLLECTION and was charged with lying because Fitzpatrick already knew WHO leaked, when and (why). If this woman went before Congress, anything she MIGHT say could be construed, wrongfully or righly, as misleading, when there was NO ILLEGAL conduct.
Are you sure about that? I thought a bench warrant was issued.
“A senior Justice Department aide refused Wednesday to submit to a private interview with a House committee...”
Smart lady. With these clowns on the committee, she probably knows whatever she says in “private” will be headlines tomorrow in the N.Y. Slimes.
If anyone could ‘plead the 5th’ for fear that the actual act of testifying may cause them to be charged with perjury, then why should anybody testify in any court of law anywhere in the United States? Wouldn’t the entire notion of a subpoena become entirely useless?
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on TV ;-)
Seriously, this was addressed on earlier threads and our Freeper lawyers did agree with what you say. One cannot "take the Fifth" to avoid incriminating themselves on crimes that they MAY commit whilst testifying.
Monica does not wish to testify. Period. And the Dims have not offered her immunity. Yet.
All in all -- this entire mess is circling the drain -- and it won't go down.
And if it gets too hot, just say I don’t remember. I can’t recall. If it is good enough for the RATS, it is good enough for us.
What happens if you don’t show up?
Sadly, the only Bush administration person with a brass set is a women
This has already been posted.
Your understanding is correct.
Thanks!
All: Posted earlier , my error.
Justice aide won’t talk to House panel
Associated Press Writer ^ | 4/4/07 | Julie Hirschfeld Davis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1812043/posts
Posted on 04/04/2007 2:04:05 PM PDT by mtnwmn
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.