Monica Goodling Testimony, Part VI
Please keep extraneous comments to a minimum to lighten the load on the servers.
The AG order just got introduced.
Tom Feeny (FL): To clarify the last point–people at DOJ who would serve in either career or political positions.In order to cover the whole realm, if people were applying for political positions as well as career,
MG I would interview them as if they were political. People would tell me flat out that the person was a Republican. Some people would just self-disclose they were Republicans. There were times I crossed the line in reference calls by asking. I'm not going to sit here and tell the Committee that it didn't play a factor. Sometimes it helped them.
Feeny: You've been a huge disappointment to those hoping to find a grand conspiracy. You've said only a few people knew you personally. You described yourself as a quiet girl. Millions of Americans are proud to have someone like you serving in government. I hope Congress can stop with this circus.
Brad Sherman (CA): I'd like to talk to you about work in hiring non-political folks. Sometimes you crossed the line when checking their references. Were your superiors at Justice aware?
MG Detailees to leadership offices, I was looking for people who would be working side by side with policy makers. Originally I was told IJ we could consider political questions.
Sherman: Who told you you could consider political factors.
MG Kyle Sampson.
Sherman: Did you ever look at FEC.com?
MG Occasionally. It wasn't that common to find that among law enforcement. I did check them for detailees. I was looking for people that would be working in political positions. I did a lot of research, I don't want to rule out that I did that.
Sherman: Detailees, Immigration judges, BIA judges, subject to an analysis that you're going to see their political giving.
MG Sometimes I would ask staff to look.
Sherman: There's been a discussion of Lam's supposed failings. DOJ responds, and says, she's doing a great job. We're on target to be 40% higher on alien smugglings. Why would DOJ tell DiFi that these criticisms were inaccurate, then fire her.
MG Department was trying to say what it could. But maybe not as much good work as Department would like to have done.
Sherman: Was there some reason you found the [response to DiFi] unpersuasive.
MG Dept would have been happier to have an even more positive response.
Lurie Gohmert (TX): Why is okay to inquire about immigration but not voter fraud. I hate to be the bearer of news but politics has always been a part of appointment process. I appreciate your testimony today. You seem to believe you did something wrong by saying a person was a liberal Democrat. Blah blah blah blah politics politics politics. There was no investigation when Clinton hired a bunch of USAs when he came in. When I was a judge and someone presented something 30 minutes before the hearing, I think it's unfair, [because I read right slow and darnit, none of my political staffers read either] And when we bring up God and Christianity Harvard itself has a quote from Psalm 8 on one of its buildings, and its official motto 400 year ago was religious. It is part of the foundation. And I would submit to my colleagues, if someone here indicate there's something wrong with being a Christian, the person on this committee could be charged under the hate crime bill, so watch you comments and votes.
Baldwin (WI): AG Gonzales' previous acknowledgement Bikupic. Do you have knowledge about who put him on the list.
MG I don't–he wasn't on the lists I saw.
Baldwin. Any knowledge about why?
MG No. I would read the press clippings, and I'd occasionally read stories that involved his office.
Baldwin: Did you ever participate in a discussion of whether he was loyal to BushCo. That he was acitve in prosecuting vote fraud?
MG I don't recall any.
Baldwin: Sampson testified that he likely would have spoken to you about Biskupic.
MG I can rule it out. Sometimes Sampson and I would talk about USAs when other jobs opened up, like ATF job, AAG, VAWA. I just don't remember any conversations about him at all.
Baldwin: DAG McNulty's testimony. You told Sampson you had concerns.
MG I raised info about caging. Elston said Dpty didn't have enough time to be comfortable with it. Most of my comments had to do with opening door to saying bad things about people who worked for us. I didn't think it was the right thing to do to say bad things. We were trying to get them to leave quietly.
Baldwin: Did you tell McNulty you had concerns, AG?
Baldwin: Did you tell Moschella about inaccuracies.
MG Conversation right outside hearing room. I thought it would be bad for the USAs. My focus was on that. I was so much more focued on the other things. I think I went on to getting Dpty ready for private briefing.
Franks (AZ): Ah have been so impressed with yar testimony today. I think we're all fortunate to have your presence in the justice department. I was struck by your motivation, to make things better. Should be motivation for govt in general. I cahnt help hear again and again, were these based on political considerations. That is certainly within the purview of the President to do that. It's okay to hire people of their own persuasion. The critical question is this abotu justice. Did you ever try to affect justice?
MG I certainly did not.
Franks: Do you know of anyone who did?
MG I can't testify to what other people were thinking. We didn't talk about what the reasons were except for Bogden, I never heard anyone say anything like that.
Schiff (NY): I'd like to ask about criteria. Let me assume for a moment that delegation of authority is a reason to be fired.
MG He could be. [she sees where this is going–perhaps to Mercer?] You'd look at the totality of circumstances in every case.
Schiff: If he removed someone from a corruption case, that would be a good reason to be fired.
MG I don't know.
Schiff: Bad morale might be a legitimate reason.
MG It'll be the totality of the circumstances.
Schiff: If Iglesias testified incompletely, that might be a reason to fire him. Certainly if someone gave incomplete testimony that would be reason to be fired.
[Pause, Monica knows where this is going.]
MG: It's not easy to give you complete answers.
Schiff: Lack of confidence might be a reason to be fired. And if a USA or other key justice official demonstrated an excess of loyalty, that might be reason to put them on a list.
MG I don't understand.
Schiff; You have a USA who improperly delegates authority, actions cause morale to plummet, testimony inconsistent or incomplete, and creates impression that loyalty overrides constitution.
MG Not my call to make.
Schiff; By that standard, shouldn't some have put AG on list to be fired. Morale has plummeted.
MG I've left department. I do think there was some inconsistencies with AG's testimony.
Schiff Senators have lost confidence in AG.
MG I've seen newspaper accounts.
Schiff, AG has created impression that loyalty is more important than constitution.
MG I don't know what I think about the topic.
Davis (AL): no confidence resolution. Gonzlaes testified he never saw a list. Is that accurate.
MG I believe he saw a list.
Davis: If GOnzales testified he had never been briefed, inaccurate?
Davis: Any other inaccuracies?
MG I don't know if I saw all of it.
Davis: AG said no discussions of USA firings.
MG He was at November 27 meeting.
Davis: When did you first become aware that Gonzales made inaccuracies in testimony.
MG Not testimony.
SmithLundgren: Witness has been asked questions about testimony.
Davis: I ask ruling on point of order.
SmithLundgren: She believed that comments she referred to went to press accounts. As matter of fairness, witness has a right to Waters Lee: Davis' is appropriate line of questioning. Dowd: you're to counsel witness, you're not a participant.
Somone appeals ruling.
Question is on the move to table.
Hearing is in recess. Parliamentary inquiry. We cannot recess uniliaterally. We've asked for a recorded vote.
Schiff: Since there's no one to record the vote.
Waters Lee: Clerk is now here. Question is now on the motion to table. Clerk will call roll.