FBI chief contradicts Gonzales' testimony

WASHINGTON — FBI Director Robert Mueller contradicted Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' sworn testimony and Senate Democrats requested a perjury investigation Thursday in a fresh barrage against President Bush's embattled longtime friend and aide.

In a third blow to the Bush administration, the Senate Judiciary Committee issued a subpoena for Karl Rove, Bush's chief political adviser, in connection with its investigation of the firings of nine U.S. attorneys, including John McKay of Seattle.

Gonzales repeatedly and emphatically told the Senate Judiciary Committee this week that the president's secretive warrantless domestic eavesdropping program was not at issue during a dramatic hospital bedside visit with ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft in 2004. Mueller, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, said it was.

"It has become apparent that the attorney general has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements," four Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote in a letter calling for Justice Department Solicitor General Paul Clement to hire a special counsel to investigate.

"I'm convinced that he's not telling the truth," added Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

The developments marked a troubling turn for Gonzales as well as the administration, which has been on the political defensive since congressional Democrats opened an investigation seven months ago into the firings of the U.S. attorneys.

That probe revealed information that Democrats have sought to weave into a pattern of improper political influence over prosecutions, of stonewalling and of deceit in sworn testimony before Congress.

The White House defiantly stuck by Gonzales on the perjury matter and flatly denied that Mueller contradicted the attorney general's sworn testimony on internal Bush administration dissent over the eavesdropping program.

"The FBI director didn't contradict the testimony," White House spokesman Tony Snow said. "It is inappropriate and unfair to ask people to testify in public settings about highly classified programs."

But the four Senate Democrats issued a list of what they said were examples of Gonzales' untruthfulness to Congress under oath — the basis for their request to Clement to appoint a special counsel.

Among those examples was his insistence to the Senate panel Tuesday that his hospital visit with Ashcroft was not related to an internal administration dispute about the eavesdropping program.

Gonzales last year told the same panel that there had been no internal administration dispute about the program, but former Deputy Attorney General James Comey told the panel that he, Ashcroft and Mueller were among top Justice Department officials who believed the program was illegal and were prepared to resign over it.

In his sworn testimony Thursday, Mueller contradicted Gonzales, saying the program — labeled by the administration as the "terrorist surveillance program," or TSP — was the topic of the hospital-room dispute among top administration officials.

Mueller was not in the hospital room at the time of the March 10, 2004, confrontation involving Ashcroft, then-White House chief of staff Andrew Card and then-White House counsel Gonzales.

Mueller said he arrived shortly after they left, and then spoke with Ashcroft.

"Did you have an understanding that the discussion was on TSP?" asked Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas.

"I had an understanding the discussion was on a NSA program, yes," Mueller answered.

Jackson Lee sought to clarify: "We use 'TSP,' we use 'warrantless wiretapping,' so would I be comfortable in saying that those were the items that were part of the discussion?"

"The discussion was on a national NSA program that has been much discussed, yes," Mueller responded.

The NSA, or National Security Agency, runs the program that eavesdropped on terror suspects in the United States, without court approval, until last January, when the program was put under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

In a statement late Thursday, Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse maintained Gonzales was referring during his testimony to an operation that has not been revealed.

Roehrkasse also suggested that operation was discussed with lawmakers at a March 10, 2004, briefing in the White House Situation Room, along with a discussion of the NSA program.

Democrats said there were other examples of Gonzales "lying," including his sworn testimony that he had not spoken about the firings with other witnesses because the was under investigation.

His former White House liaison, Monica Goodling, testified under a grant of immunity that Gonzales had privately recounted his recollections of the firings and asked for her opinion on his version.

Not signing the letter to Clement was Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who instead sent a letter to Gonzales on Thursday giving him a week to resolve inconsistencies in his testimony.

Ranking Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania agreed, calling the demand for a special counsel premature.

Meanwhile, Leahy subpoenaed Rove, the architect of Bush's rise to the White House, to provide testimony and documents related to the firings by Aug. 2.

Also subpoenaed is a White House political aide, J. Scott Jennings. The Justice Department included both men on e-mails about the firings and the administration's response to the congressional investigation.

White House counsel Fred Fielding consistently has said top presidential aides — present and past — are immune from subpoenas and has declared the documents sought off-limits under executive privilege.