Democracy for New Mexico

Video: Iglesias Testifies in Senate on Wilson, Domenici Calls

Former U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, David Iglesias, testifies at this morning's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in response to questions by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). He contradicts the statements made by both Rep. Heather Wilson and Sen. Pete Domenici about the calls.

KUNM Audio: Albuquerque's public radio station, KUNM, has audio of Iglesias' 11+ minute exchange with Sen. Arlen Specter at the hearing, as well as audio of a news story on the matter that includes comments made by Iglesias at a news conference last week.

Meanwhile, Sen. Domenici released a statement after Iglesias' testimony saying he still doesn't know what Iglesias is talking about. I wonder if he issued it in his pajamas, er, hunting trousers....

Democratic Party of New Mexico Weighs In
John Wertheim, Chair of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, had this to say today about the conduct of Rep. Wilson and Sen. Domenici:

“It’s a real shame when people who present themselves as honest disgrace their political careers and their constituents by placing partisan gain above ethical governance,” said John V. Wertheim, Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico.  “Wilson and Domenici brought pressure to bear on the U.S. Attorney and then sought political retribution when Iglesias would not co-operate.  This politically-motivated intervention into the judicial process is a very grave matter.  I hope Wilson and Domenici will start confronting their misconduct responsibly, stop denying its impact and stop blaming constituents for their behavior.”

Here's the entire statement released today by the Democratic Party of New Mexico:

IGLESIAS CONTRADICTS WILSON, DOMENICI

The depths of vulnerable Republican Congresswoman Heather Wilson’s hypocrisy was exposed today.  In front of House and Senate Committees, recently ousted U.S. Attorney David Iglesias testified that Wilson and U.S. Senator Pete Domenici pressured him to speed up ongoing investigations.  If handed down prior to the election, the alleged indictments would have provided partisan benefit to the embattled Wilson.

Iglesias’ testimony and news reports show that both Wilson and Domenici intervened in an ongoing investigation by contacting the U.S. Attorney’s office in October of 2006.  Wilson, whose knowledge of sealed indictments is itself suspicious, was lagging in public opinion polls at the time of the inappropriate calls.  Despite her cozy relationship with scandal-plagued congressional Republicans, Wilson made ethics and public corruption a central campaign issue.

“It’s a real shame when people who present themselves as honest disgrace their political careers and their constituents by placing partisan gain above ethical governance,” said John V. Wertheim, Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico.  “Wilson and Domenici brought pressure to bear on the U.S. Attorney and then sought political retribution when Iglesias would not co-operate.  This politically-motivated intervention into the judicial process is a very grave matter.  I hope Wilson and Domenici will start confronting their misconduct responsibly, stop denying its impact and stop blaming constituents for their behavior.”

Wilson’s and Domenici’s initial attempts to stonewall the media only highlighted their guilty conduct.  Domenici and Wilson finally admitted in written statements that they phoned Iglesias.  Although their statements seem waffling and inconsistent, both Wilson and Domenici disingenuously blame anonymousconstituents for prompting them to violate congressional ethics rules.

An independent watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has filed a complaint against Domenici with the Senate Ethics Committee.  Communication by members of congress to U.S. Attorneys is inherently suspect because of congressional members role in the selection, approval and funding of U.S. Attorneys.  As the Washington Post editorialized today the calls were, "ethically dicey in any circumstance." [www.citizensforethics.org/]

Iglesias’ testimony today illustrates how Senator Domenici expressed his displeasure with the pace of the investigation by abruptly hanging up the phone when he became unhappy with Iglesias' response to his inquiry.  Meanwhile, Wilson has many questions to answer about, among other things, how and why she became involved in researching sealed indictments

The Democratic Party of New Mexico

Rapidly Emerging Stories on Iglesias Matter

Talking Points Memo reports "the White House 'was aware of [Domenici's] concerns' and as we showed last night, Domenici's concerns were Iglesias' too slow pace of indicting Democrats."

TPMmuckraker has video of the key portion of Iglesias' testimony this morning before the Senate Judiciary Committee. So does Think Progress.

Here's a live stream of this afternoon's House Judiciary Committee hearing on the attorney firings, and a Daily Kos thread is dedicated to live blogging. Health Haussamen has a local version on the House hearing.

After filing a complaint about Sen. Pete Domenici yesterday with the Senate ethics committee, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) today requested an investigation into Rep. Heather Wilson (R, NM-01) by the House ethics committee. Click for their complete letter. In their press release regarding Wilson, CREW said:

Rep. Wilson’s call to Mr. Iglesias violates chapter 7 of the House ethics manual, which prohibits members from contacting executive or agency officials regarding the merits of matters under their formal consideration. House rules also state that if a member wants to affect the outcome of a matter in litigation, the member can file a brief with the court, make a floor statement, or insert a statement into the Congressional Record. Directly calling officials to influence an ongoing enforcement matter is not an option.

House rules also state that a member may not claim he or she was merely requesting “background information” or a “status report” because the House has recognized that such requests “may in effect be an indirect or subtle effort to influence the substantive outcome of the proceedings.”

Rep. Wilson’s conduct may also violate the requirement that members conduct themselves in a manner that “reflects creditably on the House.” In a precedent cited by the House ethics committee when it admonished former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), the House has held that members are prohibited from asking an executive branch employee to engage in an activity having an impermissible political purpose.

CREW’s complaint alleges Rep. Wilson contacted Mr. Iglesias to discuss an ongoing investigative matter for the impermissible political purpose of harming Democrats in the November elections.

In Bloomberg's Fired Prosecutor Says He Was Warned to Keep Quiet, "H.E. "Bud'' Cummins told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Mike Elston, the deputy attorney general's top aide, threatened him with retaliation in a phone call last month if he went public [about his negative views of the firings]. Cummins said he passed the warning on to five U.S. attorneys who were ousted last December, believing that was what Elston wanted.

And don't forget my earlier post on this morning's testimony.

Subpoena Day for Fired U.S. Attorneys

UPDATE: All this, plus we learn that Scooter "Liar" Libby has been found guilty of 4 out of 5 counts in the Plame leak case, including perjury and obstruction of justice. The chickens are definitely coming home to roost, aren't they? Think Progress has video clips.
*************

Today hearings are taking place in committees in both the U.S. House (this afternoon) and Senate (this morning) featuring the testimony of many of the fired U.S. Attorneys. Las Cruces blogger Heath Haussamen is live blogging them them with frequent updates. The Senate Judiciary Committee is first up. You can also watch on C-SPAN 3 TV or online. The four former U.S. attorneys who will testify today before Senate Judiciary are David Iglesias of New Mexico; Carol Lam, former U.S. attorney for Southern California; John McKay, former U.S. attorney for Western Washington; and H.E. “Bud” Cummins II, former U.S. attorney for Eastern Arkansas.

As reported by Haussamen, here's testimony from Iglesias prompted by Sen. Chuck Schumer at this morning's Senate Judiciary hearing:

Iglesias told the committee that Domenici and Wilson were the two who called him in October, the first time he has said so publicly.

The first call was made “on or about Oct. 16,” he said, by Wilson. He said the call was “quite brief.” He then said that the second call, “approximately two weeks later,” on Oct. 26 or Oct. 27, came from Domenici. He said Domenici Chief of Staff Steve Bell called him at home to tell him Domenici wanted to speak with him.

Bell indicated “there were some complaints by citizens,” then handed the phone to Domenici. Domenici, he said, asked about pending public corruption cases.

“He said, ‘Are these going to be filed before November?’”

Iglesias told Domenici they would not, he said. Domenici, he testified, said, “I’m very sorry to hear that,” and hung up the phone.

“I felt sick after that,” Iglesias said. “… I felt leaned on. I felt pressured to get these matters moving.”

He said it was “unprecedented” for a senator to call him at home.

As for the initial call from Wilson, Iglesias said Wilson said she had “been hearing about sealed indictments, and asked, ‘What can you tell me about sealed indictments?’”

“You cannot talk about indictments,” Iglesias testified. “… I was evasive and unresponsive.”

He said he tried to explain to her why he could not talk about the indictments.

“She was not happy… and she said, ‘Well, I guess I’ll have to take your word for it,’” and ended the call, Iglesias testified.

And in response to questions from Sen. Arlen Specter:

Specter asked Iglesias about Domenici’s and Wilson’s statements, in which they have admitted to calling but denied pressuring Iglesias.

“Is Sen. Domenici wrong?” Specter asked.

Iglesias said Domenici didn’t directly threaten him, but “the fact that he would call and ask about any specific investigation was a threatening call.”

The timing of the call was a factor in making him feel threatened, Iglesias said. Iglesias said his prosecution of the treasurer scandal had become the focus of the First Congressional District campaign.

“Public corruption was a huge battle being waged by Patricia Madrid and Heather Wilson, and I assiduously tried to stay out of that,” Iglesias said, adding that Domenici’s inquiry, because of that, was inappropriate and threatening.

Iglesias admitted that Domenici said no more than Domenici asserts – that he called to ask about the case – but “the fact that the line went dead” after that led to him feeling pressured.

In a statement released Monday night, Wilson asserted that she called Iglesias to inquire about an allegation that he was denying prosecutions in a public corruption case. She said she didn’t ask about the timing of indictments, tell him what she thought he should do or pressure him, and said the allegation was made by someone else.

Asked if Wilson said anything else during the conversation, Iglesias said Wilson never told her the allegation came from someone else. And she left out a key fact in her statement, Iglesias said.

“She wanted to talk about the ‘so-called’ sealed indictments – something I could not talk about,” Iglesias said.

Iglesias said he felt the calls were inappropriate but admitted not reporting them.

“Sen. Domenici had been a mentor to me… and Heather Wilson was a friend,” he said, adding that he felt a conflict between his loyalty to them and his duty to report what he claims happened.

Now go read the rest at Haussamen.

Think Progress has some video clips of Iglesias' testimony this morning.

More Local Blog Coverge:
Avelino Maestas over at Live From Silver City has some excellent commentary and analysis, and counters the desperate spin being applied by a couple of local Republican bloggers. As usual, Joe Monahan has the inside track on what his notorious political "alligators" are saying around the state on the case, and always has something compelling to add. We're blessed with some excellent political blogs here in the Land of Enchantment these days, so visit them often to get a good idea of what New Mexicans are thinking and saying about the important stories emerging locally.

Breaking: Heather Wilson Admits Calling Iglesias

Rep. Heather Wilson (R, NM-01) claims she was trying to "help" U.S. Attorney David Iglesias when she called him about his public corruption investigations. Click for her complete statement. A Washington Post article also reported:

Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) acknowledged today that she contacted a federal prosecutor to complain about the pace of his public corruption investigations, as the Senate Ethics Committee signaled that it had opened a preliminary inquiry into a similar communication by the state's senior senator, Pete V. Domenici (R).

... "I did not ask about the timing of any indictments and I did not tell Mr. Iglesias what course of action I thought he should take or pressure him in any way," Wilson said in a statement to the Washington Post. "The conversation was brief and professional."

... Wilson said in her statement that many of her constituents had complained about "the slow pace of federal prosecutions" in corruption cases and said she was told by one unidentified constituent that "Iglesias was intentionally delaying corruption investigations."

Wilson also said she was trying to help Iglesias: "If the purpose of my call has somehow been misperceived, I am sorry for any confusion. I thought it was important for Mr. Iglesias to receive this information and, if necessary, have the opportunity to clear his name."

... Iglesias, one of seven U.S. attorneys fired by the Justice Department on Dec. 7, is expected to testify to Congress tomorrow that Wilson and Domenici were indeed trying to sway the course of his investigation. [emphasis mine]

Domenici: I'm Sorry, So Sorry; CREW Files Ethics Complaint Against Pete

What a load of double talk. First Pete Domenici claims he doesn't know what Iglesias is talking about when revelations are made about Pete's pressuring calls to the U.S. Attorney. After days of stonewalling, Domenici suddenly has an epiphany and remembers the calls, but claims they were innocuous, innocent, run-of-the-mill inquiries checking on progress. Then he ends with an apology, saying he should never have made the calls (see statement). Why would he be saying he's sorry about calls that were perfectly justifiable and ethical in nature, according to his own characterization? And why would the Senator himself be making calls to Iglesias about mundane, how-are-things-going matters when he's got a bunch of staffers to handle business as usual queries like that?

It's obvious Domenici stayed quiet until he counld rendezvous with Alberto's Justice Department hacks and get his story aligned with their carefully crafted excuses. Oh, nobody, Domenici included, was pushing anything political or doing anything unusual in the unprecedented mass firings of eight U.S. Attorneys. After all, it's not like the Bush administration has any record of operating completely in the political realm on every issue or anything. It's just a coincidence that political operative supreme Karl Rove occupies a space cheek by jowl with The Decider in the White House. No, all the fuss was merely about rooting out poor performers and getting more immigration and drug prosecutions. The fact that many of the fired attorneys were involved in politically sensitive cases was just happenstance. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

As Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo has mentioned, if a federal prosecutor gets a personal call from a powerful homestate Senator about an open case that has huge political implications, it's a little more signficant than a howdy do. The Senator doesn't have to be verbally specific during such a call to make it known that pressure is being applied in no uncertain terms.

Ethics Charge Filed Today Against Domenici
Naomi Seligman Steiner of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington had said that if Iglesias named Wilson and Domenici, then CREW would "certainly" draft an ethics complaint against Domenici in the Senate and ask the House ethics committee to investigate Wilson. Today, they followed through with a complaint against Domenici, based on his own admissions of making calls to Iglesias.

In their press release, CREW notes that:

In a discussion of Senate Rule 43, the Senate Ethics Manual states that “[t]he general advice of the Ethics Committee concerning pending court actions is that Senate offices should refrain from intervening in such legal actions . . . until the matter has reached a resolution in the courts.” The manual also indicates that Senators are not to communicate with an agency regarding ongoing enforcement or investigative matters.

And as reported in an article in Sunday's Washington Post:

Stanley Brand, an ethics lawyer who served as House counsel in the 1980s, said Iglesias's allegation could result in internal congressional ethics probes. "It's going to precipitate a huge problem," Brand said, warning also of a potential review by the Justice Department.

Finally, here's what Talking Points Memo, which has become THE provider of online info on this case, has to say today about what we can expect during tomorrow's hearings in both House and the Senate committees.

On the matter of Mr. Iglesias's testimony on Tuesday, let's remember a few things. Sen. Domenici (R-NM) and the political appointees at the Justice Department have strong motivations for supporting each others claims about management shortcomings during Mr. Iglesias's tenure -- despite the fact that there appears to be little if any evidence for this prior to Iglesias's ouster. Domenici has already if not lied than intentionally misled the public about his contacts with Iglesias. Remember, when first asked about Iglesias's claims about calls to his office from members of the New Mexico, Domenici said "I have no idea what he's talking about." It's only by the most generous and clement interpretation that that statement doesn't peg Domenici as a liar. So he's already misled the public and taken an action which even by the most innocent reading appears to violate congressional ethics rules. He doesn't have much credibility. The folks at Main Justice don't have much either when you consider that they've run through several different explanations at this point for why Iglesias was fired.

So let's see what Iglesias says. He's levelled extremely serious charges. So he deserves scrutiny too. But let's not miss that we're about to witness that most familiar of Bush era storylines, the whistleblower heading into the buzzsaw, with the full panoply of DOJ, Republican senators, National Review yakkers and RNC smearlords ready to crank up the noise machine to make sure Iglesias is too bashed and bruised by the end of the week to make his charges amount to anything.

Excuse Game Continues on Iglesias Firing

A front page story by Miss Laura at Daily Kos provides a nice summary of the latest in the firing of eight U.S. Attorneys, including David Iglesias. The White House admits it approved the decisions and claims it made a mistake in not explaining, upfront, that the firings were due to the attorneys "not doing enough to carry out President Bush's policies on immigration, firearms and other issues." Right, that's why there was so much secrecy and misinformation surrounding them. Note that the Bushies are now claiming those relieved of their duties were selected based on complaints to the Justice Department from various officials. Pete Domenici is mentioned as being one of the complainers who raised concerns about the performance of Iglesias, particularly on immigration, although he still won't admit he called Iglesias. I wonder if the excuses being offered by the administration will change again, like their ever-fluid reasons for attacking and occupying Iraq.

In related news, Christy Hardin Smith over at firedoglake is threatening to help organize an email/fax-in targeting the House and Senate Ethics Committees if they don't open investigations into the pressuring phone calls to Iglesias by Heather Wilson and Pete Domenici. The ethics rules clearly prohibit such intervention in federal investigations and prosecutions.

Tune in Today to 1350 AM Radio's Insight New Mexico

Albuquerque's weekly progressive talk radio show, Insight New Mexico, airs every Saturday from 3:00 to 4:00 PM on 1350 AM. The shows are rebroadcast on Sunday mornings from 7-8:00 PM. Host Eric Griego and sidekick Suzanne Prescott will bring you another serving of interviews, listener call-ins and political news. Today's show will feature NM House Majority Leader Kenny Martinez reporting in from the Legislature in Santa Fe where the action is nonstop this weekend, talented Live From Silver City blogger Avelino Maestas, who is also a staff writer for the Silver City Daily Press, and the in-the-know Heather Brewer, Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice New Mexico.

Eric is expecting a direct report from the NM Senate on today's impeachment resolution action. AND, he's getting ready to make a MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT, which he MAY or MAY NOT be making on the air today. Don't miss it.

Visit the Insight New Mexico website for more info on the show its guests, helpful links, blogging and podcasts (mp3s) from previous shows. You can call in live during the show with your questions and comments at 338-4090.

Patricia Madrid Weighs in on Iglesias Firing

Las Cruces blogger Heath Haussamen has an exclusive interview about the David Iglesias firing with former Attorney General Patricia Madrid, who was Rep. Heather Wilson's Democratic opponent in the November 2006 election in NM-01. Just go read it. Quite the scoop. Former reporter Haussamen is doing some stellar work these days ....

(Updated) Video of Iglesias KRQE Interview and More on Wilson - Domenici Ethics Scandal

UPDATE: Albuquerque's KOB-TV Eyewitness News 4 has video of their interview with David Iglesias.
************

Albuquerque's KRQE News 13 aired a live one-on-one interview yesterday with fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias conducted by news anchor Dick Knipfing. Click to watch video. Iglesias states that he got two separate calls on two separate days during the period of mid-to-late October 2006, each by a different member of the NM Congressional delegation, not staffers. Iglesias also said:

"I felt leaned on, I felt pressured to take immediate action."

"It's the only time during my five and a half year tenure as U.S. Attorney that I got a call from any member of Congress discussing any specific case or investigation.

"No recordings, and I'm reviewing possible documents I may be taking to the house for their review."

[Iglesias was asked] "When was the corruption matter going to be made public? When was I gonna go forward on prosecutions?"

A U.S. House Justice subcommittee has issued subpoenas to Iglesias and three other fired U.S. Attorneys and will hear their testimony on Tuesday. In addition, the Senate Judiciary Committee is sending letters to the same four asking them to testify voluntarily on Tuesday. If their testimony provides even a hint of possible unethical behavior related to their firings by a U.S. Justice Department headed by Bush toady Alberto Gonzales, Congressional Democrats are expected to launch one or more full-fledged ethics investigations into the matter. If that happens, the headlilnes nationwide and locally will no doubt be extremely damaging to the political futures of both Rep. Heather Wilson (NM-01) and Sen. Pete Domenici (D-NM). A post on Talking Points Memo has C-SPAN video of Sen. Chuck Schumer talking about the firing of Iglesias in terms of "politics of the worst sort."

The latest dispatch from McClatchy Newspapers, which broke much of the initial information on the firings, quotes two unnamed sources "familiar with the contacts" by members of the NM Congressional delegation about the calls:

Wilson was curt after Iglesias was "non-responsive" to her questions about whether an indictment would be unsealed, said the two individuals, who asked not to be identified because they feared possible political repercussions. Rumors had spread throughout the New Mexico legal community that an indictment of at least one Democrat was sealed.

Domenici, who wasn't up for re-election, called about a week and a half later and was more persistent than Wilson, the people said. When Iglesias said an indictment wouldn't be handed down until at least December, the line went dead.

As for how the growing scandal might affect the expected prosecution of alleged criminal offenses related to the construction of two state courthouses in NM, McClatchy reported:

The alleged involvement of the two Republican lawmakers raises questions about possible violations of House of Representatives and Senate ethics rules and could taint the criminal investigation into the award of an $82 million courthouse contract.

NPR also interviewed Igelsias yesterday. Click to listen. Excerpts:

The first call was in mid-October. The caller was asking –- this was not a staff member, an actual member of Congress -- the person was asking about “I want to know if there are any sealed indictments.” And I said, “Sealed indictments? We only do that for juvenile cases or national security cases. It’s fairly unusual.” Instantly red flags went up. I didn’t want to talk about it. Federal prosecutors can’t talk about indictments in general until they’re made public. So I was evasive, I shucked and jived like Walter Payton used to for the Chicago Bears, and the call was ended rather abruptly....

Approximately a week and a half later I got a second call from another member of Congress wanting to know about when the corruption matters were going to filed. Again, red lights went on. It was a very unpleasant phone call, because I know that members of Congress should not be making phone calls about pending matters, pending investigations, indictment dates, things of that nature.

Asked why he didn't want to name the callers, Iglesias said:

Because frankly, I’m afraid of retaliation. I live in a very small state with a very small legal community. And I’m frankly afraid if I go public right now, that there could be retaliation in terms of me being blacklisted, blackballed… you pick your adjective.

(Updated) New Mexico Democrats: Move Now to Capture Domenici's Senate Seat

UPDATE: Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo reports that many reporters are staking out Sen. Domenici and Rep. Wilson today, trying to get a response to the Iglesias story. Nothing yet.
*******************

On the heels of the unfolding scandal about what looks to be the very improper firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and seven others, Jonathan Singer at MyDD echoes the calls I'm hearing from many Democrats in New Mexico. Democrats should go after Pete Domenici's Senate seat in a serious, organized way. Recommended start? How about Rep. Tom Udall, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, Mayor Marty Chavez, or other A-list candidates rethinking a challenge against Domenici? And how about some spending on tv and/or radio ads calling Domenici (and Rep. Heather Wilson) out on alleged conduct unbecoming in the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias? Singer says:

I have written for some time that New Mexico's aging Republican Senator, Pete Domenici, should be among the Democrats' top targets in 2008, not only because his conservative views are way outside of the mainstream -- particularly for a state as balanced politically as New Mexico -- but also because his Jim Bunning-like actions (walking around the Senate in pajama bottoms) raise real questions about his competence to serve another six years. But new questions surrounding the possibility that Domenici abused his office for partisan political reasons should further enlarge the target on the Senator's back.

...  the headline remains that Domenici potentially used his office for partisan political gain, a big no-no, as it were. And given the possibility that Domenici just might not be up to a heated campaign that not only questions his fitness to serve but also his intentions and trustworthiness, it's incumbent upon the Democrats, both inside New Mexico and those trying to extend the party's majority in the U.S. Senate, to begin to put pressure on Domenici to retire rather than stand for reelection, as he has indicated an intention to do.

If this means an investment of $50,000 of $100,000 today for television and newspaper ads throughout New Mexico calling Domenici out for his alleged actions I think it would certainly be worth it.

Additionally the Democrats also need to ramp up their recruitment drive in the state. A number of potential Democratic heavyweights -- Rep. Tom Udall and Albuquerque mayor Martin Chavez, to take two examples -- have stated an unwillingness to run for the Senate in 2008 if Domenici were to run for reelection. Yet if they, or other candidates of their potential strength, were to flirt with a run today, they might, along with an ad buy by the DSCC or the Democratic Party of New Mexico, be able to sufficiently scare Domenici so that he decides against seeking another term. There is little potential downside to such a move but great potential upside, and as such there seems to be little reason to me why such a combined effort should not be undertaken at this point. [emphasis mine]

Come on folks. Imagine what would be going on if a Democratic Senator and Representative were being implicated in a rapidly expanding political scandal like this one. And yet, the Democratic Party of New Mexico has yet (to my knowledge) even issued a press release on this story or provided a quote to the media. Wake up out there!

The worst thing that could happen would be for NM Dems to sit on their hands while Repubs set up a plan to make excuses for Domenici's and Wilson's alleged outrageous conduct. Imagine a scenario where they manage to save enough of Wilson's reputation to insert her into the race for Senate at the last moment, with Domenici withdrawing. I could go on with possible scenarios, but the key point is that in politics, you have to strike when the iron is hot. Like now.