Press Conference with Senator Charles Schumer
HEADLINE: NEWS CONFERENCE WITH SENATOR CHARLES SCHUMER (D-NY)
SUBJECT: INVESTIGATION OF IDENTITY OF CIA AGENT LEAK
LOCATION: SENATE RADIO TV GALLERY, WASHINGTON, D.C.
BODY:
SEN. SCHUMER: Good morning, everybody -- or good afternoon, everybody. I'm Senator Chuck Schumer. Sorry I was late. Ready?
Okay, today I am asking Attorney General Ashcroft to formally recuse himself from the Justice Department's investigation into whether senior White House officials illegally leaked a covert CIA operative's identity to the media.
Each day this week has brought a new reason for the attorney general to remove himself from this case, and to let a special counsel handle the matter. We are continuing our push for the special counsel, and the polls today show that the American people are in overwhelming agreement.
The attorney general hasn't ruled out special counsel, but until a special counsel is appointed, Attorney General Ashcroft should be recused -- immediately. There are two reasons that -- well, today we've learned of yet another reason for the Justice -- today we have learned of yet another reason why the attorney general should recuse himself, and that is the Justice Department's own regulations. A federal prosecutor cannot issue a subpoena to, or seek telephone records from, a member of the media without the express approval of the attorney general. That's part of their regulations. In fact, the DOJ regulations clearly state that, quote, "No subpoena may be issued to any member of the news media, or for the telephone toll records of any member of the news media," without, quote, "the express authorization of the attorney general." The standard for the approval of a subpoena to the medias requires the federal prosecutor to simply show that there are, quote, "reasonable grounds to believe, based on information obtained from non-media sources, that a crime has occurred, and that the information sought is essential to a successful investigation, particularly with reference to directing established guilt or innocence.
I for one am very concerned about whether Mr. Ashcroft is capable of making that kind of decision. He sits on the National Security Council, and works with top officials in the administration in the war on terrorism every day. And of course there are the conflicts. He has close political ties with one of the White House's top advisors, including many other people as well who have worked on his nomination to become attorney general. In other words, we have read about his close ties to Karl Rove, but there are ties to many others as well.
In addition, the attorney general is surrounded by staff at the Justice Department who have close ties to the White House, the Republican National Committee, and the Bush-Cheney campaign. These are the staffers advising him. So not only does the attorney general have his own conflicts with the people he may be investigating; but so do many of his advisors. The acting attorney general, the acting deputy attorney general, Robert D. McCallum, was inducted into Skull and Bones at Yale with President Bush in 1968. DOJ Deputy Chief of Staff David Israelite (ph) served as the director of political and governmental affairs for the Republican National Committee in 1999 and 2000. Solicitor General Ted Olson was the lead counsel for President Bush during the 2000 Florida recount, and argued Mr. Bush's appeal before the Supreme Court. In addition, Rachel Brand, the principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Policy, served as associate counsel in the White House. This situation cries out for Senator Ashcroft -- sorry -- this situation cries out for Attorney General Ashcroft to be as far away from this investigation as possible. And that's why we are asking him to recuse himself immediately, and appoint a special counsel as quickly as possible.
It's not that Mr. Ashcroft doesn't recognize the need to remove himself from investigations -- he's done it before. He took himself out of a case involving then-Senator Torricelli, because Torricelli campaigned against him in his 2000 Senate race. Well, if it was clear that the attorney general had to recuse himself in a case involving a person who campaigned against him, he certainly should recuse himself when he's investigating people who work with him and for him. The bottom line is very simple: If there was ever a case where the attorney general should recuse himself, it's this one. And, as we said, because the attorney general has been so close to the president, every day questions are brought up -- legitimate questions -- about the fairness and thoroughness of the investigation. We all know that the Justice Department heard about the CIA's request for an investigation on Tuesday. They decided to open an investigation on Friday, but didn't notify the White House until Monday. And then, when they notified the White House Monday, Counsel Gonzalez asked to wait until Tuesday morning to send out notice to prevent documents from being destroyed. I've talked to many top prosecutors -- they are amazed that this happened, because the first rule in a prosecution is preserve the documents, preserve the evidence. And that is not what happened here.
The bottom line is that the attorney general is so inextricably locked up with the people he's investigating, he can't do a fair job. It's basically impossible. And so special counsel is the best way to go until he decides that he should be recused -- plain and simple.
One final point. We read in today's Washington Post that one of the reactions is going -- one of the Republican staffers, unnamed, said that their reaction was to slime the opposition. I find that reprehensible, and it's ironic that's the whole reason why the White House is under investigation now for this concept that the way to succeed is not by argument, is not by truth, is not by fact -- is to slime the opposition. And they say that Ambassador Wilson is a Democrat. So what? If a murder is committed, and someone cries out and says, Find the murderer -- you say, Well, he's a Democrat -- what's the difference? You have got to get to the bottom of the crime, no matter what the motivation of those who are asking you to get to the bottom of the crime are. So that doesn't -- that just doesn't stand up.
The American people, as it became clear today, want the truth. They want a thorough, impartial and fearless investigation to take the evidence wherever it leads. So far the White House and the attorney general are doing very little to garner any confidence that they are doing this investigation fully, fairly and fearlessly. The only way they can get out of this mess that they put themselves into is for the attorney general to recuse himself immediately.
Yes?
Q Senator, do you -- (inaudible) -- the appointment of a special counsel still keeps the attorney general in control.
SEN. SCHUMER: Right.
Q So given that, is one of your points that could that type of investigation be as vigorous and as independent as --
SEN. SCHUMER: Look, the independent counsel law would have been the best way to go. We don't have that. But if you combine a special counsel with an attorney general recusal, then you have a pretty good, fair, thorough and independent investigation, because if the attorney general is recused, the next person down the line will serve that role, should a special counsel be appointed. And the attorney general himself, who has all these conflicts with the people he may well be investigating, won't be involved.
So because you have a special prosecutor or a special counsel doesn't mean that solves the problem of the attorney general recusal -- you are right -- we should have both.
Q Should Mr. McCallum and General Olson also recuse themselves? And, if they did, who would be the person who would appoint the special counsel?
SEN. SCHUMER: The Justice Department has many, many fine people in the line of command, and you'd have to go down the line of command until you found someone who was not really having any relationships, any close relationships, with those that he or she might investigate. My guess is if you looked at the top four or five people in the Justice Department you'd get to one of them.
Q During the Kennedy administration, Bobby Kennedy was the attorney general. He also had been his brother's campaign manager. He presided over some politically sensitive prosecutions. Are you saying you would be in favor of special counsel no matter who the attorney general was?
SEN. SCHUMER: No. There are two models for attorney general. One is you appoint a close political associate or a close friend. That's a very reasonable model. That's what President Bush did. That's what President Kennedy did when he appointed his brother. But when you appoint someone who is very close to you, personally or politically, you lose any hope of independence. And that's why in those situations a special counsel, a recusal is much more important than if you appointed -- then if you took the other way to go, which would be appoint someone who is a seasoned prosecutor. President Clinton took that model -- Janet Reno -- and there was far more distance between herself and President Clinton than there is between President Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft, or John Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy. Now, Bobby Kennedy took some politically tough investigations, politically sensitive investigations. None of them involved people in the White House. You couldn't design -- you couldn't come up with a closer nexus than Attorney General Ashcroft and the people who are in the White House right now. So, you know, if you were asked -- if he was asked to do something in the Labor Department or out in the political world, it's quite different.
Q Senator, you talked about the -- that this was a 12-hour delay from the time --
SEN. SCHUMER: Yes.
Q -- that the administration and the FBI -- (inaudible) -- out his email. Do you have any evidence, or do you expect that during that 12-hour period that people in the White House were sweeping their trails on this?
SEN. SCHUMER: Who knows? I mean, one of the first questions I'd ask is, between the Friday and the Monday, when the Justice Department decided to do an investigation, and the White House was notified, were there informal contacts? It seems likely. Did word whisper about in the White House that, Oh, they are going to ask for an investigation Monday about this, that and the other thing? That's not good prosecution, and so it could have happened. I would hope that if there were special counsel, or if there were a clean and pure investigation, that that would be something that would be looked into, because any investigation looks for potential obstruction of justice, potential destruction of evidence.
Q As a follow-up to that -- one of the other points you made or reasons that Mr. Ashcroft should recuse himself was because of his close association with Karl Rove. Do you suspect or have any information that Mr. Rove is one of the leakers?
SEN. SCHUMER: I have no idea who it is. He has been named in various -- by various people in various places. But if he's even a potential person -- and I have no idea whether he did it or not -- the attorney general shouldn't be at the top of an investigation that looks into him.
Q Senator, one broader question about that -- (off mike) -- people still have faith in President Bush.
SEN. SCHUMER: You know, I've said -- I've said it seems to me, you know, it's not part of President Bush's character to have ordered this. President Bush has made it a trademark, both -- well, certainly while he's president, that he cares about and protects our front-line troops. Ms. Plame and others who work for the intelligence agency are our front-line troops. So I think those two are not inconsistent. I think what the American people are saying in that poll -- first they want independence and thoroughness above all. But, second, what's the argument against it? I haven't heard a single argument against a special counsel. Ask Mr. McClellan -- why not do it? Well, yes, maybe the Justice Department has good prosecutors. But they're not the only good prosecutors, and they can certainly avoid an appearance of any conflict.
Q And just to follow on, do you think the president's own credibility and integrity, which is one of the things that is held up most over this time, is in jeopardy along with the president?
SEN. SCHUMER: I think if the American people think that this investigation is not totally on the up and up, the president's credibility is certainly on the line, yes -- especially a president who has made it his -- one of his hallmarks -- as he should -- I'm glad he has -- the defense of our troops, our front-line people, whether they be soldiers or intelligence agents.
Q Sir, what legislative vehicles are you looking at right now to reintroduce your amendment --
SEN. SCHUMER: Well, we are actually looking at the emergency supplemental right now.
Q Other options?
SEN. SCHUMER: Look, we -- the bottom line is this is an executive decision. We can't force the executive branch to do the right thing. But we certainly, certainly believe there ought to be debate and discussion on the floor of the Senate, and we'll look for the best opportunities to do that.
Q So on the supplemental, are you talking about some type of non-binding --
SEN. SCHUMER: Well, it's a sense of -- there's no binding. You cannot bind them to do this. But you can --
Q Sense of the Senate?
SEN. SCHUMER: It would be a sense of the Senate, correct.
Last one.
Q Some people have pointed to the parallel between the Clinton administration Justice Department that prosecuted Dan Rostenkowski -- who was a very powerful person at that point -- as evidence that a career prosecutor can do the job when allowed to do the job. Is that totally different?
SEN. SCHUMER: Well, the bottom line is Dan Rostenkowski was a separate political entity. The chain of command in this case goes to the same place, which is the White House.
Q Senator, just one last one. If there's open to this -- (inaudible) -- confirmation, if the president nominates -- (inaudible) -- deputy attorney general --
SEN. SCHUMER: Right, it is open. Yeah, it does.
Q Should the Democrats be willing to let that nomination go forward on the --
SEN. SCHUMER: Well, let me answer it in somewhat of a different way. I think the president should look for some people who are not part of the political system, who are respected lawyers, who have independence from the White House, to fill those positions, particularly in light of what's happened here. Thanks.