While You Were Watching Katrina
House
Republicans derail probes of Plame affair
published: September 13, 2005
Republicans on three separate congressional committees this week derailed three formal "resolutions
of inquiry" by Democrats that would have required the Bush administration to turn over sensitive information and records
relating to the outing of CIA officer
Valerie Plame.
Had the resolutions of inquiry been adopted, they would have led to the first independent congressional inquiries
of the Plame affair, and perhaps even the public testimony of senior Bush administration aides such as Karl Rove, the White
House deputy chief of staff, and I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, about their personal
roles.
As things currently stand, a special prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, continues to conduct a grand jury investigation
of Rove, Libby, and other White House officials, but the public has gained scant insight into what, if anything, that inquiry
has uncovered.
Votes on all three House committees this week were along strictly partisan lines. The House Select Committee
on Intelligence voted 11-9 on Thursday to adversely report H. Res. 418, which would have opened a formal inquiry by Congress
of the Plame affair. The House International Relations Committee voted 26-21 against the same resolution one day earlier.
And the House Judiciary Committee voted 15-11 on Wednesday as well against launching an inquiry.
Republicans argued
that any vote in favor of the resolution might impair Fitzgerald’s ongoing probe. In the case of the House Intelligence
Committee, they were aided when, at the very last minute, the Justice Department informed the committee that Fitzgerald himself
opposed any independent inquiry by Congress at this point.
In a letter to the committee, dated September 14, William
E. Moschella, an assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, wrote: "Mr. Fitzgerald has advised that production
at this time of the documents responsive to H. Res.418 and the other resolutions, and any attendant hearings, would interfere
with his investigation. Accordingly, we request that the committee report adversely H. Res. 418."
Democrats, however,
pointed out that Congress engaged in its own extensive formal investigations of Watergate and Whitewater even while special
prosecutors conducted criminal inquiries.
Representative John Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat and former
chairman of the Judiciary Committee, made just that point during the debate, telling his colleagues:
"Let us not forget the endless hearings in this committee and others on alleged Clinton-Gore campaign finance
violations, the Whitewater claims, and Clinton White House Travel Office firings. These were matters all under Justice Department
review at the time of our hearings.
"Finally, I must remind my colleagues of the numerous House and Senate hearings
on Watergate that were simultaneous with the Justice Department's own investigation."
In making the case for the
resolutions, Conyers also cited a recent Voice story about the rationale for appointing a special prosecutor. The article disclosed that Justice Department officials made that
crucial move because investigators had serious concerns that then attorney general John Ashcroft continued to receive regular
briefings about the inquiry despite the fact that Karl Rove—a close personal and political friend of Ashcroft—had
become a subject of the probe. The story quoted senior law enforcement sources as saying that Ashcroft continued the briefings
even after he was told investigators firmly believed that Rove had withheld important information from them during an FBI
interview.
Conyers questioned the Justice Department's handling of the Plame investigation prior to Fitzgerald's appointment virtually since its inception, alleging that Bush administration
officials botched the initial stages of the inquiry, or perhaps even purposely stymied the efforts of investigators:
"The
purpose of this resolution is to get to the bottom of what happened and why the Justice Department slow-walked the investigation
at the beginning. We know that, despite [initial] urgent pleas from the CIA for a criminal investigation into the leaker,
the Justice Department and White House dragged their feet. The Department then waited three days before notifying the White
House of the breach and subsequent investigation. The White House then waited an additional 11 hours before telling staff
to preserve evidence."
Conyers wasn’t done there:
"We now know that then attorney general John
Ashcroft insisted on being briefed on Department interviews of Mr. Rove that were conducted in connection with the leak. He
did so despite his own long-standing ties to Mr. Rove; Mr. Ashcroft had paid Mr. Rove almost $750,000 for work on several
campaigns. That Mr. Ashcroft eventually recused himself demonstrates there were conflicts of interest with his continued involvement."
A Justice Department spokesman did not return telephone calls for comment either on Wednesday or Thursday. Ashcroft
also declined to comment.
The House Armed Services Committee will be soon the fourth congressional committee to consider
the matter. Their vote is scheduled for September 20. But it's similarly unlikely that any Republicans will break ranks and
vote in favor an inquiry.