Leahy Rebukes White House For
Continued Failure
To Comply With Congressional
Subpoenas
WASHINGTON (Thursday, August 14,
2008) – In a letter sent Thursday to the White House, Senate
Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Thursday
rebuffed the administration’s efforts to stonewall congressional
investigators.
Responding to an August 7 letter
from White House Counsel Fred Fielding, Leahy rejected the
administration’s efforts to “run out the clock” on subpoenas
issued by the Senate and House Judiciary Committees to current
and former White House officials, including Chief of Staff
Joshua Bolten and former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl
Rove. The House of Representatives has filed a case against
Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers in federal
court, and in a July 31 ruling, U.S. District Court Judge John
Bates rejected President Bush’s claim that senior White House
officials are not required to comply with congressional
subpoenas. Leahy immediately
sent letters to
Fielding and
Robert Luskin, Rove’s attorney, to schedule dates for Bolten
and Rove to appear before the Committee.
On
August 7, Bolten and Miers requested that Judge Bates stay
the ruling until the case is appealed. In a
letter sent to Leahy the same day, Fielding stated that the
White House would await the outcome of the appeal before
“entertaining any requests” for compliance with the
Congressional subpoenas.
“Your continued reliance on
unprecedented ‘immunity’ claims places the administration
starkly at odds with Congress, the federal court, and the rule
of law,” Leahy wrote to Fielding Thursday.
The Senate Judiciary Committee
last year issued subpoenas to both
Rove and
Bolten in connection with their involvement with the
politicization of the Department of Justice, and the hiring and
firing of U.S. Attorneys. Both
failed to provide testimony to the Committee, citing
executive privilege and immunity from congressional subpoenas.
Following Leahy’s November
ruling that those claims were unfounded, a bipartisan group
of Committee members voted to report contempt citations for Rove
and Bolten in
December. The White House has rejected the Judiciary
Committee’s efforts to reach an accommodation for testimony from
Rove and Bolten, instead insisting only on off-the-record
interviews behind closed doors, and without transcripts.
“Despite the conclusion of your
August 7 letter, which stated that you ‘remain available’ to
explore ‘ways to reach an accommodation,’ you have made no
proposals and taken no steps toward compliance with the Senate
Judiciary Committee’s subpoenas or with the court’s order,”
Leahy wrote. “Such hollow words are no substitute for action,
especially given this administration’s unwillingness to engage
in good faith accommodations in the past, the interposed months
of delay, and your legal position having been repudiated by the
court.”
The full text of Leahy’s letter
follows. A PDF is also available
online.
# # # # #
August 14, 2008
Mr. Fred Fielding, Esq.
Counsel to the President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20500
Dear Mr. Fielding:
Despite the July 31 decision and
order from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
by which Judge Bates rejected the administration’s unprecedented
claim of “absolute immunity” from congressional subpoenas, by
your letter dated August 7, 2008, the administration, again,
refused to comply with the Senate Judiciary Committee’s validly
issued subpoenas for the attendance of Karl Rove and Joshua
Bolten.
Last November, I ruled that the
White House’s executive privilege and immunity claims
were not legally valid to excuse Mr. Rove and Mr. Bolten from
testifying and producing documents in compliance with the
Committee’s subpoenas. After their continued non-compliance,
the Committee by a bipartisan vote found Mr. Rove and Mr. Bolten
in contempt of Congress.
I had noted that the
administration’s “immunity” claims flew in the face of legal and
historical precedence and noted that the administration
did not and cannot cite a single court decision in support of
its contention. Judge Bates agreed, stating in his July 31
decision that the “Executive’s current claim of absolute
immunity from compelled congressional process for senior
presidential aides is without any support in the case law.” I
had tried in my July 31 letters to schedule the long overdue
appearances by Mr. Rove and Mr. Bolten. Instead, your continued
reliance on unprecedented “immunity” claims places the
administration starkly at odds with Congress, the federal court,
and the rule of law.
Further, as Judge Bates recounted
in his decision, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Conyers and
I have expended extensive effort over more than a year trying to
reach an accommodation with this administration. You rejected
our efforts and insisted on your initial take-it-or-leave-it
proposal for off-the-record, backroom interviews with no
transcript, no oath, and no ability to follow up, which would
have denied Congress the ability to fulfill its legislative and
oversight responsibilities.
I reluctantly moved to issue
subpoenas only after having exhausted every avenue, sending
nearly a dozen letters seeking voluntary cooperation with the
Committee’s investigation to the White House and its current and
former employees. Having obstructed our proceedings for more
than a year, and having unsuccessfully resisted the House’s
action in court, it certainly seems that your intention is
simply to run out the clock. It is clear to me that this
administration has no interest in complying with its lawful duty
or showing respect to the rulings of Congress or the courts.
Despite mounting evidence of
significant involvement by White House officials, the White
House has still not produced a single document, a list of the
materials withheld or the factual basis for any specific claim
of executive privilege. When I wrote to the President a year
ago following the suggestion of Senator Specter to ask the
President to sit down with us and work out an accommodation, my
offer was flatly rejected. Despite the conclusion of your
August 7 letter, which stated that you “remain available” to
explore “ways to reach an accommodation,” you have made no
proposals and taken no steps toward compliance with the Senate
Judiciary Committee’s subpoenas or with the court’s order. Such
hollow words are no substitute for action, especially given this
administration’s unwillingness to engage in good faith
accommodations in the past, the interposed months of delay, and
your legal position having been repudiated by the court.
Sincerely,
PATRICK LEAHY
Chairman
cc: The Honorable
Arlen Specter
# # # # #
