{"id":1360,"date":"2007-03-06T20:20:00","date_gmt":"2007-03-07T02:20:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/03\/iglesias-reveals-political-motivation-but-the-truth-might-still-mean-censures-for-wilson-and-domenici\/"},"modified":"2007-03-06T20:20:00","modified_gmt":"2007-03-07T02:20:00","slug":"iglesias-reveals-political-motivation-but-the-truth-might-still-mean-censures-for-wilson-and-domenici","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/03\/iglesias-reveals-political-motivation-but-the-truth-might-still-mean-censures-for-wilson-and-domenici\/","title":{"rendered":"Iglesias reveals political motivation, but the truth might still mean censures for Wilson and Domenici"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>It was clear during a lengthy day of testimony today that politics are at play in the investigation into the firing of eight U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorneys, but there are also serious allegations being probed. <\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Those made by David Iglesias, the former U.S.<\/st1:country-region> attorney for New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:state>, are among the most grave.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Politics aside, one thing seems clear: Regardless of which versions of October phone calls are closer to the truth, the two members of Congress who called Iglesias to inquire about a pending public corruption probe could be guilty of ethics violations that might earn them censures.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

As it did Monday in the case of Sen. Pete Domenici<\/a>, R-N.M., Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington<\/a> filed a complaint<\/a> today against Rep. Heather Wilson<\/a>, R-N.M. It asked the House Committee on Standards for Ethical Conduct to investigate whether her call to Iglesias violated ethics rules.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Many analysts say Congressional rules prevent direct contact with prosecutors about pending cases, even if no pressure is applied. That helps members avoid the appearance of attempting to influence an investigation.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The group that has filed the ethics complaints contends that the House forbids even a request for \u201cbackground information\u201d or a \u201cstatus report\u201d on a pending investigation because such requests \u201cmay in effect be an indirect or subtle effort to influence the substantive outcome of the proceedings.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

It\u2019s that whole appearance-of-impropriety problem the state\u2019s Republicans have been so quick to criticize Democrats for failing to avoid in the past couple of years.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

It will be up to committees in the Senate and House to decide whether Domenici and Wilson violated ethical rules. In the meantime, the two are taking the only position they can: that they didn\u2019t attempt to influence the investigation and their calls were harmless.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Versions of phone calls are similar<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

As Iglesias testified today, it became clear that there\u2019s little more than a fine line between the differing versions of the phone calls.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Domenici says he asked about the timeframe of a pending public corruption investigation, was told it would be continuing for a \u201clengthy period,\u201d and ended the call. Iglesias contends Domenici asked whether there would be indictments before November, he responded there would not, and Domenici said he was \u201csorry to hear that\u201d and hung up.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

It was the hanging up that Iglesias said led him to feel intimidated.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Iglesias contends Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> asked whether there were sealed indictments in the case, and ended the call after he refused to answer her questions. Wilson<\/st1:city><\/st1:place> said she didn\u2019t ask about sealed indictments, but asked about an allegation made to her that Iglesias was \u201cintentionally delaying\u201d the investigation.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Iglesias said the inappropriate nature of Wilson<\/st1:city><\/st1:place>\u2019s questions \u2013 asking for details he couldn\u2019t share \u2013 led him to feel intimidated.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Lest you chalk this all up to a simple misunderstanding, there\u2019s one more fact to consider: Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city>\u2019s call to Iglesias came shortly after the second of four polls released in October showed her behind in her race against Democrat Patricia Madrid for the first time in the contest. Domenici\u2019s call came about four days after the fourth polled showed his heir apparent losing in her re-election bid, and less than two weeks before Election Day.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

In a statement issued this evening, Domenici said he agrees with most details of Iglesias\u2019 version of the phone call. He said Iglesias \u201cconfirmed that our conversation was brief and that my words did not threaten him, nor did I direct him to take any course of action.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

That\u2019s not quite true. Iglesias said Domenici never threatened him, but said he felt threatened by the phone call, especially in light of the way it ended.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

There was one point on which Domenici took issue. He said he and \u201cthose who overheard my side of the brief conversation\u201d don\u2019t recall him mentioning the November election.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Regardless, Domenici argued that the call was harmless.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cI did not pressure him. I asked a timing question. He responded,\u201d Domenici said. \u201cI concluded the conversation.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Even if their motives were pure, the timing of the calls creates an appearance of potential impropriety around two seasoned political veterans who have prided themselves on ethical behavior.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Politics are at play<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Today\u2019s hearings were peppered with political comments as some Democrats seized on the opportunity the slam the Bush Administration and some Republicans adamantly defended the administration, Domenici and Wilson.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

One significant political development was the admission by Iglesias while testifying before the Senate committee that he didn\u2019t report the calls from Domenici and Wilson because he considered Domenici a \u201cmentor\u201d and Wilson a \u201cfriend.\u201d He admitted he let that loyalty override his belief that the calls were inappropriate and the requirement that he report such activity to supervisors.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The stunning admission raises questions about whether Iglesias allowed politics to influence any other decisions he made in his official capacity as U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorney.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

When asked why he later went public about the phone calls, Iglesias made an equally stunning statement \u2013 \u201cloyalty is a two way street\u201d \u2013 in explaining that he turned on Domenici and Wilson because he believed they had turned on him and sought his firing.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

So it was political payback that motivated Iglesias to go public and place the two members of Congress at the center of a national scandal.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Iglesias also stumbled over his words while trying to explain to the House subcommittee his decision to not report the calls. When asked, he initially said he did report them, but not until the end of February, on his last day as U.S.<\/st1:place><\/st1:country-region> attorney. When asked who in the Justice Department he reported them to on that day, Iglesias backtracked, at first saying he reported it to the media, not the Justice Department, and then saying he hadn\u2019t said that he reported the calls.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

It was clear then that Iglesias may come out of this scandal in better shape than Domenici and Wilson in the eyes of the public, but his image won\u2019t be untarnished.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It was clear during a lengthy day of testimony today that politics are at play in the investigation into the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, but there are also serious allegations being probed. Those made by David Iglesias, the former U.S. attorney for New Mexico, are among the most grave. Politics aside, one thing seems […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1360","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1360"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1360\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}