U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., are still refusing to talk about whether they had a hand in forcing out former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, even as a House subcommittee is issuing subpoenas in an attempt to find the truth.
Meanwhile, the spokesman for a congresswoman leading the House investigation says any House members who pressured Iglesias to issue indictments in a public corruption scandal in order to affect the November 2006 elections might have committed ethics violations.
Iglesias claims he was forced from his job by the Bush Administration because he refused pressure in October from two members of
Though he has refused to name the members, three of the five – Democratic Sen. Jeff Bingaman and Rep. Tom Udall and Republican Rep. Steve Pearce – were quick on Wednesday to say they didn’t do it.
Domenici and Wilson, on the other hand, aren’t talking.
“We just have no comment on anything dealing with the
Tracked down today by the Associated Press, Domenici and Wilson refused to comment.
“I don’t have any comment,” the news service quoted Domenici as saying. “I have no idea what he’s talking about.”
“You should contact the Department of Justice on that personnel matter,” the news service quoted
The Justice Department contends that Iglesias, whose last day was Wednesday, was let go for poor performance.
In the meantime, Bingaman confirmed today for the Albuquerque Tribune what I first reported Wednesday: that Jason Bowles, a defense attorney for former state Treasurer Robert Vigil, is under consideration to replace Iglesias. Larry Gomez, an attorney in the office, is running the show on an interim basis.
Vigil was convicted on one count of attempted bribery last year but acquitted on 23 other felony counts, and his handling of that situation earned Iglesias the disdain of many fellow Republicans. Bowles is currently appealing Vigil’s conviction.
‘It could be an ethics violation’
But it’s the scandal over the alleged involvement of Domenici and Wilson, and the larger question of why the Bush Administration let go of eight U.S. attorneys two years before the end of Bush’s term, that has the attention of Washington.
Members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law voted today to subpoena Iglesias and some of the other fired attorneys to testify under oath and publicly about the situation. Some worry the attorneys were removed so the Bush Administration could use a previously little-known provision in the Patriot Act that allows interim U.S. attorneys to serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation.
That essentially allows the Bush Administration to sidestep the confirmation process, should it opt to go that route, which it has already done in at least one instance. Gallegos has previously told me Domenici expects Iglesias’ replacement to go through the confirmation process.
A spokesman for Rep. Linda Lopez, D-Calif. and the subcommittee’s chairwoman, said it’s early in the investigation, and the committee simply wants to know more about the circumstances of the firings.
“We’re not prejudging anything,” spokesman Jim Dau told me.
Still, he said, he is aware of Iglesias’ allegations, and said the subcommittee has considered the fact that the investigation could include members of Congress. If House members pressured Iglesias, he said, “those members could be violating the ex-parte communications provision of the House ethics manual.”
“It could be an ethics violation,” Dau said.
I’ve been unable to determine whether the Senate has a similar rule, but a Senate committee is also investigating and will likely issue subpoenas in the coming days.
Update, 5:40 p.m.
Iglesias is scheduled to testify before the House subcommittee Tuesday at
In an interview with National Public Radio this evening, he again refused to name the two members of Congress he said pressured him on the indictments, but said he may do so on Tuesday.
“If directed to do so, I will publicly announce who called me on what days,” Iglesias told NPR.
In revealing details about the two phone calls, Iglesias made reference, without naming
Iglesias revealed that one member of Congress called him in mid-October and asked whether there were any sealed indictments in the case. He said “red flags went up,” because the member should not have made such an inquiry, but he responded by saying sealed indictments were only used in cases involving juveniles.
Iglesias told NPR he was “evasive” of the member’s questions, and “the call was ended rather abruptly.”
He said a second member of Congress called him about a week and a half later and asked when indictments would be handed down in the case. He said that phone call was somewhat contentious when he refused to answer questions.
Asked why he didn’t report the calls to supervisors as required by Department of Justice rules, Iglesias said he was “stunned” and decided to let the incidents slide, saying he “had never had anything like that happen before.”
“Looking back, I think I was drastically wrong about that,” he said about his decision to not report the calls.