Democracy for New Mexico

Isn't It Time to Impeach Cheney?

Learn More and Sign the Petition

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT FOR CHENEY
From HR 333 Introduced in US House of Representatives

ARTICLE I. Fabricated threat of Iraq WMD.
Cheney has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests.

ARTICLE II: Fabricated ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda.
Cheney purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests.

ARTICLE III: Threatening Iran.
Cheney has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States.

Dozens of supporting documents for all three articles of impeachment can be found here.

The complete H.Res 333, Articles of Impeachment Against Vice President Richard B. Cheney, is available here.

The Washington Post's 5-part series on the Cheney Vice Presidency.

Wikipedia has the history of H.Res 333.

A thorough archive of Cheney's distortions and deceptions on Iraq is available from Rep. Henry Waxman's office .

Go on now, DO SOMETHING!

Coalition:

14 Representatives support H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment Against Dick Cheney: Yvette Clarke William Lacy Clay Keith Ellison Bob Filner Jesse Jackson Jr. Hank Johnson Dennis Kucinich Barbara Lee Jim McDermott Jim Moran Jan Schakowsky Maxine Waters Lynn Woolsey Albert Wynn

A28.org AfterDowningStreet Backbone Campaign BradBlog Brave New Films BuzzFlash Code Pink Democracy Rising Democrats.com Grass Roots America 4 Us HipHopCaucus ImpeachBush.tv Impeach For Peace.org ImpeachSpace.com The Nation National Lawyers Guild OpEdNews.com People's Email Network Progressive Democrats of America United for Peace and Justice Velvet Revolution World Can't Wait

When In the Course of Human Events ...

Olbermann Special Comment: Bush, Cheney Should Resign
Keith Olbermann, MSNBC Countdown
Tuesday 03 July 2007

Text version:

"I didn't vote for him," an American once said, "But he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

That - on this eve of the 4th of July - is the essence of this democracy, in 17 words. And that is what President Bush threw away yesterday in commuting the sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

The man who said those 17 words - improbably enough - was the actor John Wayne. And Wayne, an ultra-conservative, said them, when he learned of the hair's-breadth election of John F. Kennedy instead of his personal favorite, Richard Nixon in 1960.

"I didn't vote for him but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

The sentiment was doubtlessly expressed earlier, but there is something especially appropriate about hearing it, now, in Wayne's voice: The crisp matter-of-fact acknowledgement that we have survived, even though for nearly two centuries now, our Commander-in-Chief has also served, simultaneously, as the head of one political party and often the scourge of all others.

We as citizens must, at some point, ignore a president's partisanship. Not that we may prosper as a nation, not that we may achieve, not that we may lead the world - but merely that we may function.

But just as essential to the seventeen words of John Wayne, is an implicit trust - a sacred trust: That the president for whom so many did not vote, can in turn suspend his political self long enough, and for matters imperative enough, to conduct himself solely for the benefit of the entire Republic.

Our generation's willingness to state "we didn't vote for him, but he's our president, and we hope he does a good job," was tested in the crucible of history, and earlier than most.

And in circumstances more tragic and threatening. And we did that with which history tasked us.

We enveloped our President in 2001. And those who did not believe he should have been elected - indeed those who did not believe he had been elected - willingly lowered their voices and assented to the sacred oath of non-partisanship.

And George W. Bush took our assent, and re-configured it, and honed it, and shaped it to a razor-sharp point and stabbed this nation in the back with it.

Were there any remaining lingering doubt otherwise, or any remaining lingering hope, it ended yesterday when Mr. Bush commuted the prison sentence of one of his own staffers.

Did so even before the appeals process was complete; did so without as much as a courtesy consultation with the Department of Justice; did so despite what James Madison - at the Constitutional Convention - said about impeaching any president who pardoned or sheltered those who had committed crimes "advised by" that president; did so without the slightest concern that even the most detached of citizens must look at the chain of events and wonder: To what degree was Mr. Libby told: break the law however you wish - the President will keep you out of prison?

In that moment, Mr. Bush, you broke that fundamental compact between yourself and the majority of this nation's citizens - the ones who did not cast votes for you. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the President of the United States. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you became merely the President of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican Party. And this is too important a time, Sir, to have a commander-in-chief who puts party over nation.

This has been, of course, the gathering legacy of this Administration. Few of its decisions have escaped the stain of politics. The extraordinary Karl Rove has spoken of "a permanent Republican majority," as if such a thing - or a permanent Democratic majority - is not antithetical to that upon which rests: our country, our history, our revolution, our freedoms.

Yet our Democracy has survived shrewder men than Karl Rove. And it has survived the frequent stain of politics upon the fabric of government. But this administration, with ever-increasing insistence and almost theocratic zealotry, has turned that stain into a massive oil spill.

The protection of the environment is turned over to those of one political party, who will financially benefit from the rape of the environment. The protections of the Constitution are turned over to those of one political party, who believe those protections unnecessary and extravagant and quaint.

The enforcement of the laws is turned over to those of one political party, who will swear beforehand that they will not enforce those laws. The choice between war and peace is turned over to those of one political party, who stand to gain vast wealth by ensuring that there is never peace, but only war.

And now, when just one cooked book gets corrected by an honest auditor, when just one trampling of the inherent and inviolable fairness of government is rejected by an impartial judge, when just one wild-eyed partisan is stopped by the figure of blind justice, this President decides that he, and not the law, must prevail.

I accuse you, Mr. Bush, of lying this country into war.

I accuse you of fabricating in the minds of your own people, a false implied link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

I accuse you of firing the generals who told you that the plans for Iraq were disastrously insufficient.

I accuse you of causing in Iraq the needless deaths of 3,586 of our brothers and sons, and sisters and daughters, and friends and neighbors.

I accuse you of subverting the Constitution, not in some misguided but sincerely-motivated struggle to combat terrorists, but to stifle dissent.

I accuse you of fomenting fear among your own people, of creating the very terror you claim to have fought.

I accuse you of exploiting that unreasoning fear, the natural fear of your own people who just want to live their lives in peace, as a political tool to slander your critics and libel your opponents.

I accuse you of handing part of this Republic over to a Vice President who is without conscience, and letting him run roughshod over it.

And I accuse you now, Mr. Bush, of giving, through that Vice President, carte blanche to Mr. Libby, to help defame Ambassador Joseph Wilson by any means necessary, to lie to Grand Juries and Special Counsel and before a court, in order to protect the mechanisms and particulars of that defamation, with your guarantee that Libby would never see prison, and, in so doing, as Ambassador Wilson himself phrased it here last night, of becoming an accessory to the obstruction of justice.

When President Nixon ordered the firing of the Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the infamous "Saturday Night Massacre" on October 20th, 1973, Cox initially responded tersely, and ominously.

"Whether ours shall be a government of laws and not of men, is now for Congress, and ultimately, the American people."

President Nixon did not understand how he had crystallized the issue of Watergate for the American people.

It had been about the obscure meaning behind an attempt to break in to a rival party's headquarters; and the labyrinthine effort to cover-up that break-in and the related crimes.

And in one night, Nixon transformed it.

Watergate - instantaneously - became a simpler issue: a President overruling the inexorable march of the law of insisting - in a way that resonated viscerally with millions who had not previously understood - that he was the law.

Not the Constitution. Not the Congress. Not the Courts. Just him.

Just - Mr. Bush - as you did, yesterday.

The twists and turns of Plame-Gate, of your precise and intricate lies that sent us into this bottomless pit of Iraq; your lies upon the lies to discredit Joe Wilson; your lies upon the lies upon the lies to throw the sand at the "referee" of Prosecutor Fitzgerald's analogy. These are complex and often painful to follow, and too much, perhaps, for the average citizen.

But when other citizens render a verdict against your man, Mr. Bush - and then you spit in the faces of those jurors and that judge and the judges who were yet to hear the appeal - the average citizen understands that, Sir.

It's the fixed ballgame and the rigged casino and the pre-arranged lottery all rolled into one - and it stinks. And they know it.

Nixon's mistake, the last and most fatal of them, the firing of Archibald Cox, was enough to cost him the presidency. And in the end, even Richard Nixon could say he could not put this nation through an impeachment.

It was far too late for it to matter then, but as the decades unfold, that single final gesture of non-partisanship, of acknowledged responsibility not to self, not to party, not to "base," but to country, echoes loudly into history. Even Richard Nixon knew it was time to resign

Would that you could say that, Mr. Bush. And that you could say it for Mr. Cheney. You both crossed the Rubicon yesterday. Which one of you chose the route, no longer matters. Which is the ventriloquist, and which the dummy, is irrelevant.

But that you have twisted the machinery of government into nothing more than a tawdry machine of politics, is the only fact that remains relevant.

It is nearly July 4th, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a King who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them - or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them - we would force our independence, and regain our sacred freedoms.

We of this time - and our leaders in Congress, of both parties - must now live up to those standards which echo through our history: Pressure, negotiate, impeach - get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.

For you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

And give us someone - anyone - about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, "I didn't vote for him, but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

[emphasis mine]

A Long Train of Abuses and Usurpations ...

San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Morford provides our Independence Day rant:

So there you have it. Bush shrugs and smirks and then commutes the easy soft-focus sit-on-your-ass-all-day-and-knit white-collar prison sentence of a hollow political lackey who, in turn, took a bullet for his sneering mafia thug of a boss, Dick Cheney, who in turn was complicit (along with lead flying monkey Karl Rove) in the appallingly illegal outing of a CIA operative, which itself was a tiny but particularly nasty link in the giant chain of lies and deceptions undertaken to lead our wary and tattered nation into an unwinnable impossible costly brutally violent war that will now last, if current estimates are correct, until the goddamn sun explodes.

You have to laugh. You have to laugh because if you do not laugh you will likely be overcome with a mad desire to stab yourself in the eye with a sharp feral cat and/or shoot yourself in the toe with a high-powered staple gun, over and over again, all while tearing out pages of the United States Constitution and crumpling them into tiny little balls and hurling them into the smoldering firepit of who-the-hell-cares as you shiver in the corner and swig from a bottle of Knob Creek and wail at the moon. Or maybe that's just me

... Bush actually ambled forth and said that, while he "respects the jury" in the Libby case, the 2.5 year sentence was simply "too harsh." Baby, if 30 months in a comfy well-stocked rape-free Martha Stewart-decorated facility for compromising national security is too harsh, I've got a draconian little thing called the Patriot Act to sell you, cheap.

Here's a swell side note: You know who gets harsher sentences than 30 months in white-collar prison, George? Pot dealers. That's right. The average sentence for a convicted marijuana dealer in California is 3.3 years. In real prison, George, not that namby-pamby Club Fed where Scooter would've played badminton and sipped tea for two years. Hell, in places like Oklahoma and Alabama, you can get a life sentence for possessing a single marijuana bud, which is ironic indeed, given how if you live in Oklahoma or Alabama, there is nothing that would serve your miserable id better than to be deeply and thoroughly stoned every single day and twice on Sunday. But that's another column.

Be sure to read the rest of Mark Morford's column, "Scooter Libby In Hell: What do Dick Cheney, Paris Hilton, "The Sopranos" and colon spasms have in common? Find out here."

Joe Wilson: Bush & Cronies "Corrupt to the Core"

Keith Olbermann speaks to former Amb. Joe Wilson by phone.

Backlash is exploding against Bush's decision to become a part of the obstruction of justice plot for which Scooter Libby was convicted and sentenced. Unofficial online polls at news outlets are running 70-75% AGAINST Bush's decision to "commute" Libby's jail sentence, and everyone from Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to bloggers to prominent attorneys to Democratic leaders are speaking out strongly against the move. Of course Bush doesn't care. How much lower can his approval rating go? And there's always that intransigent 25% or so of our population that sticks with Bush no matter what he does or how he does it. They're enthusiastic about the commutation in that unreasoning, hypocritical way of theirs.

How would you answer this post on Firedoglake about the strategy of the Dems in the face of the belligerent stonewalling and criminalities of the Bush Administration? Excerpt:

Ask yourself this: suppose the Democrats had announced weeks/months ago that impeachment was “on the table,” that they were deeply concerned about the Administration’s abuse of power, that it was undermining the Constitution and the rule of law across the board. There’s lots more you could add to the list, but you get the idea. Suppose they had said that impeachment wasn’t what they’d planned, and they certainly didn’t need it to retake the White House in 2008, but that they had become so concerned about the Administration’s blatant lawlessness that they wanted to make sure a vehicle was in place before then, if it seemed needed to prevent irretrievable damage.

Suppose they had also said that the Administration’s very acts of stonewalling every investigation being conducted to uncover wrongdoing could be viewed as an abuse of power, a coverup and potential support for an article of impeachment. For example, take the inquiry into whether the Administration had been careless in protecting national security secrets and assets; were they still trying to coverup the lying? Suppose that had been the setting yesterday, just before the President slipped his commutation into the media.

1. Would the President have hestitated in his actions yesterday?

2. Would the President have paid a higher price for his actions? e.g., would the public be more likely to see yesterday’s actions as a confirmation of what the Democrats had been saying? Would that give the Republican’s pause in defending it?

3. Would Democrats be in better shape both politically and legally to respond to the White House tactics regarding subpoenas and other investigative actions?

4. Would the Democrats be in better or worse shape for making the argument that the regime does not deserve to be in office, and that hence, removing them from office was now a more legitimate question?

5. Would the Democrats be in better or worse shape for the 2008 elections?

6. Would the country be in a better position to use its constitutional mechanisms to defend the rule of law, in a way that would strengthen those mechanisms for the future?

That's a yes or better to all six questions, isn't it? As I've said before, someone needs to teach the Dems in Washington how to play poker .... and SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER!

No Jail for Scooter: Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence

As reported on TPMmuckraker, which also has Bush's entire statement from late this afternoon. Bottom line: Bush commuted Libby's original sentence of thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine by stripping the sentence of the 2 1/2 years of jail time. Bush said "I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive." As we all know, he's The Decider, the justice system be damned. Less than three years in jail for convictions on two felonies, as sentenced by a conservative judge? Yeah, excessive.

More at Raw Story, including reactions from Reid and Conures. By commuting Libby's sentence rather than pardoning him, Libby can still take the 5th if called before Congress to testify. Slick, ain't it?

I think of all those unmonied, unwhite people sitting in federal prisons doing time under mandatory sentences for relatively minor drug infractions and the like and this development makes me sick. How about you?   

Repub Rep. Foley: Obscenities, Spitting Tobacco Juice and Charging at Cops

Arrest Mug Shot: NM Rep. Dan Foley (R-Chaves County) with tobacco spitting residue evident on his shirt

The Roswell Daily Record provides the photo (above) and the story on what the police report on Foley's Sunday arrest at a youth basketball game reveals. You really should read the whole thing, but here's an especially telling excerpt:

Screaming profanities at an opposing coach, the Roswell Republican rushed the court and spat chewing tobacco at an officer before being arrested, police said.

... "I told Mr. Foley to 'get back,' but Mr. Foley continued to push forward," Carrasco said in the incident report. "I attempted to pull Mr. Foley back, but Mr. Foley pushed forward (charged) in an aggressive stance. ... I pulled Mr. Foley back and placed him on the ground facing up... I held Mr. Foley down ... to stop him from getting up." One witness said Foley had been yelling at players and officials during previous games. The witness told police that when Foley was being escorted to the mall security office for police questioning, the crowd began to cheer.

During questioning at the mall, the aggression continued, the report said. Foley asked for officers' names, saying he was going to "have our jobs," an officer said. "Mr. Foley used too many obscenities to be remembered," the officer said.

If convicted at his August 2nd trial, Foley would face a potential maximum fine of $784 and 20 days in jail. He's entered a not guilty plea to charges of disorderly conduct, obstructing an officer and resisting arrest and is reportedly requesting a jury trial.

Click for our previous post on the arrest of Foley.

(Updated) Republican NM House Leader Arrested During Altercation in Roswell

UPDATE: KOB News 4 has video of a response from Foley. He states he won't apologize.
*************
State Rep. Dan Foley (R-Roswell), who serves as the Republican House Minority Whip in the NM Legislature, was arrested Sunday night in Roswell. According to a Roswell Daily Record article,

State Rep. Dan Foley, R-Roswell, was arrested Sunday evening by Roswell police officers after an altercation during the Gus Macker basketball tournament which was being staged in the back parking lot of the Roswell Mall.

... Charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and obstructing an officer, Foley was booked into CCDC Sunday evening and faces a $900 surety bond, according to Moe Espinoza, a CCDC corrections officer.

Click for a video of a KRQE News 13 story about Foley's arrest that aired last night. The story states that, "During that confrontation, a police officer took Foley down." Foley has since bonded out of the Chaves County Detention Center and faces arraignment on Tuesday, June 26th, in Roswell.

Ironically, Rep. Foley is a member of the NM Legislature's Judiciary Committee as well as an advisory member of its Interim Courts, Corrections & Justice Committee and its Interim Legislative Ethics Committee. He's also known as a "law and order," conservative.

Rep. Foley also got into hot water in February of 2006 for requesting a flyover by F-16s at the opening of a Roswell Toyota car dealership owned by Tom Krumland, a prominent Republican donor and 2004 RNC delegate. As reported in an Albuquerque Journal article:

The leader of the New Mexico National Guard has ordered an investigation into a flyover by four F-16 fighter planes for the opening of a Roswell auto dealership.

Brig. Gen. Kenny Montoya authorized the flyover for the day before Veterans Day after being asked by Rep. Dan Foley, R-Roswell. Montoya acknowledged this week that he should have looked closer at the request.

Ah the circles are small in New Mexico. According to a item on Talking Points Memo, it turns out that Tom Krumland's wife, Linda Chavez Krumland, chaired a group called New Mexicans for Honest Courts that bought anti-David Iglesias radio ads earlier this year.

(Corrected) June 26: Anti-Torture Vigil & Street Drama at ABQ Federal Building

6.27.07 CORRECTION: Please note that according to an email I received today from Robert Stoppel, a member of the Board of Directors for a Guerilla Street Theatre collaborative called, La Cucaracha Stew Co. in Albuquerque, the "STREET DRAMA" portion of this demonstration was planned, constructed, and performed by La Cucaracha Stew Co. La Cucaracha is the only politically active street theatre company in Albuquerque. Robert Stoppel can be reached at lacucarachastewco@gmail.com.
***********

From Amnesty International Albuquerque Chapter 101:
A street theater enactment of “Guantanamo: A Life Sentence With No Trial” will be held at the Federal Building, 333 Lomas Blvd. NW in Albuquerque, from Noon to 1 PM on June 26th. Organized by Amnesty International Albuquerque Chapter 101, and cosponsored by theFirst Unitarian Social Justice Council and the ACLU of New Mexico, the event commemorates the UN's International Day in Support of Torture Victims and Survivors.

Vigils and congressional visits across the nation will be held during the week of June 26th calling for a stop to torture in U.S. operated detention facilities. Also being demanded is the repeal of the Military Commissions Act, which authorizes the suspension of habeas corpus for those accused of being enemy combatants. (This means that the accused may be held indefinitely and their right to know what they are being charged with and their right to a trial that meets international fair trial standards have been suspended.)

In addition, please write Senator Domenici and Representative Wilson and ask them to withdraw their support for the Military Commissions Act.

For further information about the vigil, please contact Ann Peterpaul at 453-2465. For more information about Albuquerque Amnesty International, and other actions in the planning stages, please contact Nell Burrus, Chapter101 coordinator, at 833-3140.

Impeach Gonzales Part 2

A second short video from Brave New Films and Democracy for America. Psst ... do something. If you haven't yet signed the petition, now's the time. Visit ImpeachGonzales.com. Here's a link to an ad (pdf) that Democracy for America is running in select newspapers, including today's edition of The Hill and this week's New York Observer, and ads later this week in the Detroit Metro Times and Los Angeles Daily News. Click to donate to DFA to help them pay for their ad campaign. Pass it on.

The second phase of the Impeach Gonzales Campaign comes at time when the movement against Gonzales is building from the grassroots and as former allies like the League of United Latin American Citizens and La Raza distance themselves from him.

"Americans around the country are standing up to voice opposition to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his politicization of the Department of Justice," said Democracy for America Chair Jim Dean. "Our message is clear: Impeach Gonzales."

"President Bush will not fire the Attorney General, but the American people can call for his Impeachment," said Filmmaker Robert Greenwald who directed the Impeach Gonzalez video. "The video shows Gonzales has no respect for the truth, for the rules of Congress and for the people of this country. How can he lead our U.S. Justice Department?"

The petition on the website will be sent to all members of the House Judiciary committee, who can begin the impeachment process as outlined in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. This massive impeachment call comes at a time when leaders in both houses are calling for No Confidence Votes against the Attorney General.

Founded by Governor Howard Dean in 2004, Democracy for America is a political action committee dedicated to campaign training, grassroots activism and supporting progressive candidates with a backbone at all levels of government - from the School Board to the Presidency. Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films uses film and viral video to create social change.

Goodling Testimony Prompts DPNM Chair Colón to Query Domenici on U.S. Attorney Firings

An article in today's Albuquerque Tribune reports on the testimony by Monica Goodling at yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing on the U.S. Attorney firings. Bottom line: She doesn't remember much of anything either. Seems everyone at the Alberto Gonzales DOJ has amnesia. Amazing how not one person in the Department of Justice will take credit for putting the names on the U.S. Attorney firing list, even though the firings were, you know, just routine and based on poor job performance.

Goodling's testimony did raise more issues about Sen. Pete Domenici's involvement in the firings:

Goodling testified she did not know who put Iglesias on the list of U.S. attorneys fired Dec. 7. But she did reveal that Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty covered up Domenici's involvement in a private briefing McNulty had with the Senate Judiciary Committee in January and in a public hearing Feb. 6.

"He thought the senator would prefer to address those concerns privately with his colleagues, and he wanted to give him (Domenici) the opportunity to do that," Goodling said.

At one staff meeting prior to the briefings, one official - she could not remember who - suggested to McNulty that somebody should call Domenici's chief of staff, Steve Bell, "and see if he wanted to address the concerns with his colleagues before the briefing took place."

Goodling did not say whether the call to Bell was made.

In response to Goodling's testimony, the new Chair of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, Brian Colón, asked Domenici and his chief of staff, Steve Bell, for some answers about their contacts with the DOJ and Rove. Click for page 1 and page 2 (pdf) of his letter to Senator Domenici. Excerpts:

This scandal has quickly spun into an indictment of the entire Department of Justice and its ability to fairly administer the nation's laws, and you stand squarely in the middle of the vortex. There is no longer any doubt that you were singularly responsible for Mr. Iglesias' firing - the only thing still in question is the manner in which you secured that firing and whether you crossed any ethical or legal lines in the process.

... The Senate Ethics Committee will weigh the legal questions surrounding your role, but in the meantime, you have a larger obligation to the people of New Mexico to finally explain your actions in detail. To that end, I request that you:

1. Detail any contacts between you and your staff, including your chief of staff Steve Bell, and Monica Goodling or other Department of Justice officials such as former Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson.
2. Detail any contacts between you or your staff, including your chief of staff Steve Bell, and Karl Rove and his staff.

If there are emails between your staff and the Department of Justice or White House office of Political Affairs, you owe it to the public to release them. If your executive assistant maintains call logs, a common practice in Senate offices, please release any such call logs noting calls either from or to the Department of Justice or White House.

As reported in the Tribune article:

McNulty had told the senators that Iglesias and the other U.S. attorneys were fired for poor performance, prompting Iglesias to reveal the phone calls from Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson, also a Albuquerque Republican, and leading to the subsequent admissions by Domenici that he had pressed Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and McNulty to fire Iglesias.

During one meeting, Goodling said she wrote down that "Domenici says he doesn't move cases," presumably referring to Iglesias. She said she didn't remember who made the comment.

Committee member Rep. Bobby Scott, a Virginia Democrat, asked if that "referred to the Aragon investigation." Goodling said she only knew about the Aragon case from press reports.

"Certainly, I knew that Senator Domenici had concerns with public corruption cases," said Goodling.

For information on other aspects of Goodling's testimony, see these AP and Washington Post articles.