Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty is just about to start his testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. He will, as expected, field a number of pointed questions about his February testimony before the Senate.
Is it true, as Monica Goodling testified, that McNulty had not been âfully candidâ about his knowledge of White House involvement in the U.S. attorney firings, of Karl Roveâs involvement? What about Goodlingâs statement that McNulty had asked her not to join him at a closed door meeting with Congress, because her presence might raise questions about the White House?
But as Iâve argued before, McNulty has a lot more to answer for beyond his testimony. The deputy attorney general acts as the direct supervisor of all U.S. attorneys, yet McNulty let himself be steamrolled by junior aides like Monica Goodling and Kyle Sampson â in one case agreeing to fire a U.S. attorney because he was a bachelor and thus didnât have a family to feed (a fact that didnât prevent him from telling the Senate Judiciary Committee that the attorney, Daniel Bogden, was removed for âperformance relatedâ reasons).
And itâs worth pointing out that McNultyâs chief of staff, Michael Elston, is also at the center of the firings. Three of the fired U.S. attorneys have come forward to say that Elston threatened them that the Justice Department would detail the reasons for their firings if they did not say quiet. National Journal reported last month that Elston had made the calls on McNultyâs orders. And that wasnât all Elston was up to.
McNulty so far has passed for something of an innocent bystander. Let’s see if today’s hearing changes that.
