Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Goodling To Testify; Funding Compromise; Gerri's Top Tips

Aired May 23, 2007 - 10:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Personal finance editor Gerri Willis tells you how.
It is Wednesday, May 23rd and you are in the CNN NEWSROOM.

HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Caught up in the furor over the U.S. attorney firings. This hour, a former Justice Department official tells her side of the story. Monica Goodling will be asked whether politics played a role in the firings. Justice Department Kelli Arena joining us now live.

Good morning to you, Kelli.

KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi.

You know, today lawmakers are really interested in what Monica Goodling will have to say about the firing of those federal prosecutors. You know, thus far, even after all the testimony that they've heard, there really isn't any clear reason why those prosecutors were chosen for dismissal. And the documents have shown us that Monica Goodling was very involved in that process and so they're hoping that she can finally shed some light on how those decisions were made.

But on top of that, Goodling was also the White House liaison, you know, for the Justice Department. And as you know, Heidi, there have been allegations all along that the White House played a far larger role in this whole fiasco than has come out. And lawmakers are hoping that maybe she can create some ties for them back to the White House in a stronger way than anyone has been able to do thus far.

COLLINS: I wonder, though, when we start touching on those types of topics, whether or not, you know, we really get anything out of it or not. Could get kind of emotional, could it not?

ARENA: It could. We're told that when she offered her resignation back in April, that she literally spent about 40 minutes in a senior Justice Department official's office just sobbing uncontrollably and saying that all she really wanted to do was to serve this president, to serve the administration. Very, very distraught. They are prepared for some very emotional testimony today. Also putting a box of tissues very strategically on the table for her.

But, you know, I think that what's interesting here is that this -- she at the time was 33 years old. She had very, very little prosecutorial experience. She was given remarkable autonomy, in many areas, and especially, Heidi, in the hiring area. And that is when it's going to get really interesting.

And, you know, she has been granted immunity. So what she says here cannot be held against her. But there are allegations, very serious allegations, and investigations underway, into whether or not she tried to bring on people to that Justice Department because they were conservatives or Republican. And in many, many of those, you know, jobs at Justice, the so-called career jobs, you're not supposed to take political affiliation into account. That is against the law.

COLLINS: Well, of course. Yes. Absolutely. When you mentioned her age, 33 years old, obviously, this is highly unusual . . .

ARENA: At the time, right.

COLLINS: High unusual to have this type of power, if you will.

ARENA: Very unusual. And that's what some people have been so stunned by, that they had these very young -- she wasn't the only very young person. And as some of the, you know, the old hands of Justice said, they knew a whole lot about politics, not a lot about justice. And so, you know, when you have inexperience, you know, sometimes mixed with, you know, zeal for doing your job and then this power thrown in, I mean, you know, you can't help but get, you know, a really poisonous potion. And so, you know, we'll see. And, you know, how forth coming she'll be.

COLLINS: Right.

ARENA: I mean, she's under oath. She has to tell the truth. But whether Congress is going to get, you know, the connections that they're looking for, you know, remains to be seen.

COLLINS: Of course. All right. We will be watching this testimony today and we are also, Kelli, going to be talking with Jeffrey Toobin, our senior legal analyst here, to get more on the legal side of things, if you will.

Thanks so much, Kelli Arena.

ARENA: You're welcome.

HARRIS: And this hour we are awaiting word out of Iraq where U.S. military officials are trying to identify a body. It is believed to be one of the servicemen who disappeared 12 days ago. CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr is at her post.

And, Barbara, what's the latest?

BARBARA STARR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Tony, as we've been discussing all morning, they are trying to make positive identification of a body that was found, that Iraqi forces turned over to the United States military in that area of southern Iraq. The reports are the body was clothed in what appeared to be an American military uniform. And they are trying to make that identification as quickly as they can. Clearly, because there are three families waiting back in the United States for word of their loved ones as this search has gone on for the three missing soldiers.

Earlier today Major General William Caldwell, the top military spokesman in Baghdad, talked about the sensitivity of this entire issue now, Tony.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAJ. GEN. WILLIAM CALDWELL, SPOKESMAN, MULTI-NATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ: Our first responsibility really is to the families. And if there's any possibility at all that this body that was given to us by the Iraqi police could be one of our missing soldiers, that they really need to hear from us first any of the details associated with that. And, obviously, we're proceeding along in a very cautious manner at this point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STARR: And, Tony, that is really what's going on behind the scenes here. They want to make that positive identification. They want the military to be the one to notify all three families about the status of their loved ones. They don't want the families to hear it from the news media.

Tony.

HARRIS: Barbara, let me drill down with one quick question. Has the military ruled out this body being the body of an Iraqi soldier?

STARR: Tough question to really answer at this point. The basic bottom line is, they are trying to make positive identification of this body. They hope they can do it visually, obviously, and have someone simply look and make that identification. If that is not possible, they may go to DNA analysis or something like that. But we should be getting word at some point in the not too distant future if they are able to make that positive I.D., that it is an American soldier.

Tony.

HARRIS: We will know soon enough. Let's leave it there.

Barbara Starr for us at the Pentagon.

Barbara, thank you.

The military reports nine more U.S. troops killed in roadside bombings and gun battles across Iraq. That raises this month's death toll for American forces in Iraq to 81 and the total number of U.S. service members killed so far in the war to 3,423.

COLLINS: An uneasy compromise. Top Democrats drop troop withdrawal time lines. How will they sell it to anti-war constituents? CNN congressional correspondent Andrea Koppel has a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ANDREA KOPPEL, ABC CORRESPONDENT, (voice over): Sensitive to criticism, Democrats caved by dropping demands for troop withdrawal time line, a top House Democrat said President Bush won't be getting everything he wants either.

REP. RAHM EMMANUEL, (D) CAUCUS CHAIRMAN: It ends the blank check on more troops, more money, more time, and more of the same. And it begins the notion that we have to have a new direction to Iraq.

KOPPEL: As part of a compromise the two sides have mostly hammered out, the new war funding bill would likely include political and economic benchmarks the Iraqi government would have to meet. If not, the U.S. would withhold much need Iraqi reconstruction aid.

But Democratic leadership aides tell CNN, the bill may also include a presidential waiver, which Mr. Bush could sign if he felt the aid was essential. In addition, the bill would require the president to make at least 18 different reports to Congress on Iraqi progress before August.

Without a time line for U.S. troop withdrawal, Speaker Pelosi risked losing support from dozens of anti-war Democrats, like New York's Jerrold Nadler (ph).

If it doesn't include a time line, is there any way that you could support it (ph)? No way.

JERROLD NADLER: I don't think so. I don't think so.

KOPPEL: To make up the votes, a Democratic leadership aide tells CNN, Democrats are confident they will get enough support from House Republicans to pass the bill. A sentiment echoed by Republicans in the Senate.

SEN. TRENT LOTT, (R) MISSISSIPPI: The president has indicated he thinks benchmarks can be beneficial. And for Congress to get reports about what's happening, shouldn't we be getting that anyway. I think we will.

KOPPEL: The deal would also include a boost to the minimum wage for the first time in almost a decade, as well as about $20 billion in additional domestic spending. Democrats hope to get a bill to the president before the end of the week.

Andrea Koppel, CNN, Capitol Hill.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARRIS: Osama bin Laden and Iraq. A White House spokesman says newly declassified intelligence links the two, showing bin Laden conspired to form a terror cell inside Iraq in 2005. The bin Laden plan, according to the White House, launch attacks against the U.S. and other countries. President Bush declassified the documents ahead of his commencement address at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy this morning. He will use the speech to defend his war strategy, making the case the U.S. cannot withdraw from Iraq because of al Qaeda's growing threat in the region.

Another reminder, live coverage of the president's speech from New London, Connecticut, in the NEWSROOM, 11:15 Eastern. That's 8:15 Pacific.

COLLINS: She breaks her silence about the fired U.S. attorneys. But will Monica Goodling's testimony this hour break new ground? We ask our senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, in the NEWSROOM.

HARRIS: In Iraq, luck is relative. A boy loses his leg, his cousin loses her life. Still a dream stays alive for this child. Carrying on in the NEWSROOM.

COLLINS: Yankee go home, but leave us your TV shows. Forget the trade ban. Cubans import American culture, in the NEWSROOM.

HARRIS: And a reminder this Memorial Day weekend to turn your frequent-flyer miles into hero miles. Fisher House will use those miles to transport service men and women wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan and their families to treatment centers around the country. Go to fisherhouse.org and do it now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Welcome back, everybody. I'm Heidi Collins. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

Seeking safety. Palestinian refugees caught in the crossfire. Their plight ahead in the NEWSROOM.

HARRIS: And I'm Tony Harris. Good morning, everyone.

A Justice Department insider, now an outsider with immunity. Her testimony about the fired prosecutors. Monica Goodling live this morning in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: She quit her job, pleaded the fifth and reportedly broke down in tears over the U.S. Attorney firings. This hour, former Justice Department staffer Monica Goodling testifies on Capitol Hill. You see her in that live shot there. Joining us now to talk about what we might expect, senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Nice to see you, Jeff.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Heidi.

COLLINS: So take us back just for a moment. Remind us what her story has been.

TOOBIN: Well, what's so peculiar about this whole scandal is that, you know, we've been talking about why 10 percent of the United States attorneys in the United States were fired late last year. And the most basic questions we still don't know the answers to. Who made the decision to fire them? And for what reason? Monica Goodling was a senior aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The reason her testimony is so important is that one of her primary responsibilities is that she was the intermediary. It was her job to deal with the White House. Make -- accommodate the White House demands on what the Justice Department should do, handle the relationship back and forth over appointments.

So the question is, you know, what did she know about Karl Rove's potential involvement, the president's chief political aide, Harriet Miers, the White House council's office? What role did they play in firing these people and why were they fired?

COLLINS: OK. So she has immunity. What's she going to say?

TOOBIN: Well, I don't know.

COLLINS: Come on.

TOOBIN: I mean, you know, based on what the other Justice Department officials have said, I expect she'll say "I don't remember" a lot. Because a lot of people, especially the attorney general himself, don't seem to have very good memories about what went on here.

What will be significant is what she knew about political or partisan motivations in getting rid of these United States attorneys. It's important to remember, there are perfectly appropriate reasons to fire a United States attorney.

COLLINS: Yes, it's been done before.

TOOBIN: If a United States attorney is not following the administration policy -- there have been allegations, for example, that Carol Lam, the United states attorney in San Diego, wasn't bringing enough immigration cases and that was a big priority of the Justice Department. That's a perfectly appropriate reason, if that was, in fact, the reason.

What's not appropriate has been suggested -- are things that have been suggested, for example, in New Mexico, where the Republican senior officials, including Senator Pete Domenici, it's been suggested, were pressuring Iglesias, prosecute more Democrats, prosecute more Democrats for vote fraud. We need help our candidates. If that's why Iglesias was fired, because he refused to prosecute more Democrats, that's totally inappropriate.

COLLINS: Obviously. Yes.

TOOBIN: So those are the kind of things we're going to try to learn something about why these people were fired.

COLLINS: But, Jeffrey, will we learn that today from this particular testimony?

TOOBIN: Well, certainly we will learn something about the involvement of the White House. That's been one of the black holes here. I mean there have been e-mails that suggested Harriet Miers suggested getting rid of all 93 U.S. attorneys.

That was apparently -- I mean that was rejected by Alberto Gonzales, the attorney general. And he said he deputized his aids, Kyle Sampson, his chief of staff, and Monica Goodling, to look into, well, which one of them should be fired. You know, reach a consensus.

That's where things vanish into a black hole as far as we know. Why did these eight or nine U.S. attorneys get on the list? That is what Monica Goodling may testify about.

The other thing that she's been involved in that I think is highly significant, and frankly, as a former assistant U.S. attorney myself, is something that is very sort of important to me, she was apparently scrutinizing all political -- all -- even very low level appointees for their political and even religious conformity. You know, asking people if they'd ever had affairs. Were they supporters of the president. Who were their favorite Supreme Court justices. Trying only to hire conservative Republicans.

You know, when I was hired as an assistant U.S. attorney in 1990, no one asked me about my politics. No one cared about my politics. It's traditionally been a completely apolitical appointment. It's illegal, in fact, to inject politics in it. That, it appears, is why she took the fifth. So that's another point.

COLLINS: All of that information, though, that your bringing up, will have to be provided in some sort of documentation or some sort of paperwork, will it not? I mean you've got the testimony, of course, as to what she remembers or what she doesn't remember regarding those very specific questions. But won't it have to be on paper somewhere? Like here's what we looked at for each one of the U.S. attorneys and they didn't measure up. See right here, in this category, this category and this category.

TOOBIN: I mean it is possible that it's on paper somewhere, but maybe it's not.

COLLINS: Yes.

TOOBIN: Maybe it was simply done orally. I mean that's one of the mysteries here.

COLLINS: No notes would have been taken?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, perhaps there are notes, perhaps there are not. There are e-mails that have come out about this process. And that's, frankly, the only thing that we know for sure. Other than that, you know, memory lapses have been abundant and some of Monica Goodling's e-mails have come out. So, certainly, she'll be questioned about those. But are there documents? Good question. And maybe we'll learn something more about that today.

COLLINS: Yes. I know that you'll be watching it with us today as she testifies. That live shot up right now. We can see Monica Goodling in the picture. Talk to you more later, Jeffrey, if we could about possible impact on Gonzales himself from all of this. TOOBIN: OK.

COLLINS: Thanks so much, Jeff.

HARRIS: And still to come this morning in the CNN NEWSROOM. A psychiatric drug to treat attention deficit disorder. Some doctors are using it to help kids lose weight. Prescription for controversy, in the NEWSROOM.

COLLINS: In Iraq, a body found. A mystery deepens. Is this one of the missing U.S. soldiers? We have new details coming up this hour live from Iraq, in the NEWSROOM.

GERRI WILLIS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Gerri Willis.

Small tips you can use to save money at the gas pump. That's next on "Top Tips" in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: All right. So we're checking out the numbers here. Dow Jones Industrial average up 54 or so, so far today, resting at almost 13,600 there. The Nasdaq up about 7. Again, we can't deny it, the numbers that everybody's watching a lot closer than me, I would imagine, are the ones on the pump. Gas prices. The eleventh day, I think it is, through the roof. So we'll talk about that. Right after this music.

HARRIS: All right. One thin dime. Every time a gallon of gas jumps that much, the average American driver sees their annual cost jump by as much as -- is this correct here, $100? So today, how to squeeze every drop. Here with some tips, CNN personal finance editor Gerri Willis.

Is that -- well, of course it's true because it's part of you segment.

WILLIS: It is true.

HARRIS: Absolutely.

WILLIS: You know, it is true. And we're going to save you some money.

HARRIS: OK. Great.

WILLIS: OK. You'll like that.

HARRIS: I love this first tip. Does it make a difference when I go, the time of day I go to fill up? I got to fill up.

WILLIS: Absolutely. You got to get there before noon, Tony. Gas retailers usually set their prices at about 10:00 a.m. or 11:00 a.m. That's when the first management shift gets in. Yes, doesn't it make sense when you think about it?

HARRIS: I hadn't thought of that but, yes, it makes perfect sense.

WILLIS: So you'll want to buy your gas early. And it makes sense also because in the summer it's cooler outside in the morning and your gas will have more density. If you buy it in the heat of the day, you could be losing as much as 1 percent of the gas you pump in your car. So go early.

HARRIS: Wow. So, you know, it's fly early. Do everything early. Fly early. Get up early. Fly early. Now fill up your gas tank early.

WILLIS: Exactly.

HARRIS: I love this next tip. Turn the nozzle. What can turning the nozzle gain you?

WILLIS: Well, when you finish filling up that gas tank, try turning the nozzle 180 degrees. Now, this will drain a bit more gas into your tank.

HARRIS: I like it. I like it. I like it.

WILLIS: I'm telling you, it's like gold, right. Those few extra drops of gas may really add up at the end of the year. And, of course, one word of caution here. Don't overfill the tank. I think everybody's done this, right?

HARRIS: Yes. Yes.

WILLIS: You don't want the excess gas spilling out over your shoes and your clothes and the ground. That's just money that you're throwing away.

And remember, if you have an older car, too, Tony, you want to tighten that gas cap. This is an important tip, too.

HARRIS: Nice. OK.

WILLIS: Because that will prevent gas from evaporating and escaping into the air. If you have a gas cap that doesn't fit tightly or you lost your cap, you've got to go out and get a new one. Replace it. Because this is one of the things that keeps you energy efficient.

HARRIS: Hey, I hadn't heard of these rebate cards. What are these rebate cards and how do you get them?

WILLIS: Well, their gas rebate cards. They're pretty common. But what most people don't know about the, is that if you have a poor credit score, the deals aren't as good as if you have a great credit score.

HARRIS: Oh, that might explain everything.

WILLIS: Yes. So if your credit score is 700 or more and you fill up your tank at least twice a month, you'll be able to get the best gas rebate cards on the market. On most of these cards you'll get a rebate of 2 percent to 5 percent on purchases. And at today's prices, that can mean savings of 16 cents a gallon. Think about that. Now if you fill up three times a month, that would save you about $100 a year. So you definitely want to check that out.

Make sure you check, too, for expiration dates to make sure you redeem the rebate you earn before they expire. The devil's in the details here. They really make you work for it. Expiration dates can rang from six months to three years. Check out what gas rebate cards are out there. Go to cardratings.com.

And, of course, if you have any questions at all about gas saving money, anything to do with your wallet really, e-mail us at toptips@cnn.com. We love hearing from viewers. We answer those questions right here every Friday.

HARRIS: Outstanding. Great to see you, Gerri. Have a great day.

WILLIS: Good to see you, Tony.

COLLINS: Osama bin Laden and Iraq. President Bush rallies support for the war with newly declassified intelligence. Case for war, in the NEWSROOM.

HARRIS: Monica Goodling, under oath, shielded by immunity. What the former top Justice Department aide knows about the fired prosecutors. Live in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: Bottom of the hour. Welcome back, everyone, to the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Tony Harris.

COLLINS: And I'm Heidi Collins.

(NEWSBREAK)

(WEATHER REPORT)

HARRIS: The missing U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Twelve days of searching and now hours of an agonizing wait. Right now U.S. military officials are trying to identify a body that may be one of the missing Americans. It was pulled from the Euphrates River today.

For new details, let's get to CNN's Arwa Damon.

Arwa, what do you know? What is the latest?

ARWA DAMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Tony, the unit here, that is the Fourth Battalion of the 31st Infantry Regiment, where the kidnapped soldiers are from, sent a representative down to Esantania (p) base to try to positively identify the body that was pulled out of the Euphrates River by Iraqi police. Now according to the military here, the body was bloated and disfigured. They are saying that they are conducting all the tests they can at this location. It is likely the body will be sent on to Dover Air Base for further DNA testing. The name of the deceased will not be released until the family has been notified.

I just spoke with the battalion commander here, who is in fact still not even saying that the military is 100 percent sure that this is definitely one of their missing soldiers, but this has been a very difficult day for this unit. They have been combing, looking for their kidnapped men, for 12 days now, running hours-long missions, working double what they normally are, triple even at times, trying to find their missing men, and really a very depressing mood here this day as the news that perhaps one of those kidnapped soldiers may have been found -- Tony.

HARRIS: All right, and let's leave it there as we await the positive identification. CNN's Arwa Damon for us. Arwa, thank you.

COLLINS: Flying this summer? Well, stormy weather could spell delays. But the government out this morning with a new flight plan. It could affect you. We'll tell you all about it, coming up in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARRIS: Let's take to you Capitol Hill. Give you a look at -- whoa, whoa. Steady that camera -- a look at the atmospherics. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' former aide about to testify this morning before the house judiciary committee on the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. The questioning of Monica Goodling, expected to go on all day long until about 4:30 or 5:30. She was granted immunity for a reason. In her testimony, perhaps we'll learn what role White House advisor Karl Rove played in crafting the list of federal prosecutors to be fired. Perhaps will, perhaps we won't. We are waiting for Monica Goodling's opening statement. Once that happens, we will bring you that statement right here in the CNN NEWSROOM.

In the meantime, to business news now. Sky high gas prices reach a new degree of pain for drivers. Susan Lisovicz is at the New York Stock Exchange with the latest milestone. Susan, good morning.

SUSAN LISOVICZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Tony. Not only are gas prices again at all-time highs, this is the longest streak of record prices on record. AAA says the price of self serve regular rose today to an 11th straight record, $3.22 a gallon. That's up about a penny from yesterday. The national average has now been above the $3 mark for 20 days in a row and that passes the 19 days gasoline was above three bucks last August following Israel's invasion of Lebanon which sent oil prices higher.

HARRIS: Man, Susan. The state of New Jersey has earned an interesting distinction in this whole gasoline saga. Explain.

LISOVICZ: You know, Tony, it's an interesting development. Suddenly the garden state is very popular.

HARRIS: Yes it is.

LISOVICZ: Nobody's making those jokes, what exit anymore.

HARRIS: That's right.

LISOVICZ: They want to get there. New Jersey is the only state in the nation with gas prices under the $3 a gallon mark. Ironically, it's one of only two states that require its stations to pump the gas for you. A lot of us like that. So why are prices so cheap in the garden state? One reason, New Jersey has four in-state refineries. While we've been hearing a lot about refinery outages, New Jersey's are running just fine. Also New Jersey's port is the main entry point for Europe's gasoline imports. And finally, New Jersey has one of the lowest gas taxes in the country, just 14 cents a gallon compared to the national average of about 21 cents. As a result, drivers from neighboring states, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, all eagerly crossing into the garden state. They'll even pay the tolls to buy gas there. This morning by the way, crude prices are slightly lower following a report showing the nation's gasoline supplies rose for the third straight week and the averages are higher, too. Back to you Tony.

HARRIS: All right, Susan, see you next hour. Just moments ago, Monica Goodling sworn in for her testimony today. Let's take a look and listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN CONYERS, CHMN, JUDICIARY COMM: Do you solemnly swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to provide the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God.

MONICA GOODLING: I do.

CONYERS: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARRIS: OK, the swearing in taking place just a moment ago. Let's take a listen now to some of the questions and answers from Monica Goodling.

CONYERS: ... in substance, that you may not refuse on the basis of your fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination to provide testimony or other information to this committee under compulsion. The order also provides that testimony or other information obtained from you under compulsion pursuant to the order may not be used against you in any criminal proceeding, nor may information derived from what you provide us under compulsion be used against you as long as the testimony and other information you provide us is truthful.

As I am sure your counsel has no doubt advised you, you are obligated to answer each question completely and truthfully. And failure to do so could subject you to prosecution for perjury or for giving false statements to Congress. So, I want to be careful about how you answer each question. And if you occasionally need to confer with your counsel Mr. Dow (ph) before answering a question, we will be happy to accommodate you in that regard. And if a member has that happen, the clock will be suspended so that our time won't be running while she might be conferring with her counsel.

With that said, Miss Goodling, pursuant to the order you now have in front of you, I direct you to answer the questions that will be put to you regarding our investigation as I have just described it. This, Miss Goodling, completes the procedure for conferring use immunity on you pursuant to the order. Now before we begin questioning, Miss Goodling, I appreciate that you have a statement in writing that you would like to make and we welcome it at this time. And we will include your statement in the record, and invite you to begin whenever you would like. I ask the clerk to distribute copies of Miss Goodling's written statement to every member of the Judiciary Committee. You may proceed whenever you'd like.

GOODLING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Chairman Conyers.

CONYERS: Pull the mike up a little closer to you, please. Nice loud voice.

GOODLING: Good morning Chairman Conyers, ranking member Smith and members of the committee. Thank you for allowing me to make this statement. With the committee's permission, I would like to submit lengthier written remarks to be entered into the record.

CONYERS: Without objection, so ordered.

GOODLING: My written remarks will address four topics that I expect will be of interest to the committee. First I wish to set the record straight regarding what I understood to be the deputy attorney general's allegation to Senator Schumer that I withheld information from him prior to his public and private testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The allegation is false. I did not withhold information from the deputy. To the contrary, I worked diligently to compile and provide the deputy with dozens of pages of statistics and other information that I thought he was likely to need based on the questions that were being asked at that time.

Despite my and other's best efforts, the deputy's public testimony wasn't complete or inaccurate in a number of respects. As explained in more detail in my written remarks, I believe the deputy was not fully candid about his knowledge of White House involvement in the replacement decision, failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of the White House's interest in selecting Tim Griffin as the interim U.S. attorney in the eastern district of Arkansas, and accurately described the department's internal assessment of the Parskey (ph) commission and failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of allegations that Tim Griffin had been involved (INAUDIBLE) during his work on the president's 2004 campaign.

After the deputy's public testimony, I continued to work to assemble information that the deputy had promised to provide in the future private session. On February 14, 2007, the deputy attended a private briefing with the Senate Judiciary Committee. That afternoon I rode with him to the Senate building intending to observe the session and support the deputy by providing any information that I had.

However, a few minutes before the private Senate briefing was to take place, the deputy made clear to me he did not think I should attend. The deputy suggested that if someone recognized me as the White House liaison, the members would be more likely to ask questions about the White House. As a result of that conversation I waited outside the room while the deputy briefed the Senate committee.

During a break Richard Hurtling (ph) told me the briefing was not going well and recommended that I return to the department immediately. Like the deputy, Mr. Hurtling suggested it could complicate matters if I was recognized as the White House liaison. As a result I returned to the department in a taxi. In light of these events I was surprised to learn that the deputy had blamed me for his incomplete or inaccurate information.

Second I wish to clarify my role as White House liaison. Despite that title, I did not hold the keys to the kingdom as some have suggested. I was not the primary White House contact for purposes of the development or approval of the U.S. attorney replacement plan. I have never attended a meeting of the White House judicial selection committee. The attorney general and Kyle Sampson attended those meetings. To the best of my recollection, I have never had a conversation with Karl Rove or Harriet Miers while I served at the Department of Justice and I'm certain that I never spoke to either of them about the hiring or firing of any U.S. attorney.

Although I did have discussions with certain members of their staffs regarding specific aspects of the replacement plan, I never recommended to them that a specific U.S. attorney be added to or removed from Mr. Sampson's list. And I do not recall that they ever communicated any such recommendation to me.

Third, I wish to address my role in selecting U.S. attorneys for replacement. I first learned that others more senior to me were discussing the possibility of replacing some U.S. attorneys at some point in mid 2005. And I believe I first saw a list of candidates for replacement in January 2006 when Mr. Sampson showed me a draft memorandum he was preparing for Harriet Miers. At that time I recommended that two of the U.S. attorneys Mr. Sampson had listed, be retained in office and that certain other U.S. attorneys be considered for replacement.

Paul Charlton and Daniel Bogden (ph) were two of the U.S. attorneys that I recommended considering for replacement. However, it appears from the documents produced to Congress by the department that Mr. Sampson did not initially accept that recommendation. Mr. Bogden and Mr. Charlton did not appear on (INAUDIBLE) of the lists sent to the White House in January, April or May and first appeared on the list in September 2006 presumably for reasons unrelated to my initial recommendation.

Although I'm prepared to tell this committee what I know about the eight replaced U.S. attorneys, the truth is that I do not know why Kevin Ryan, John McKay, Carol Lamb, Paul Charlton, Daniel Bogden, David Lacey (ph) and Margaret Kerra (ph) were asked to resign in December of 2006. I can describe what I and others discussed as the reasons for their removal, but I just can't guarantee that these reasons are the same as those contemplated by the final decision makers who requested these resignations.

However, I'm not aware of anybody within the department ever suggesting the replacement of these U.S. attorneys to interfere with a particular case or in retaliation for prosecuting or refusing to prosecute any particular case for political advantage.

Fourth, I wish to clarify my role in career hiring at the department. During my five years at the department, I believe that I interviewed hundreds of job applicants and the vast majority of these were applicants for political appointee positions, but some were applicants for certain categories of career positions. Specifically I interviewed candidates who were to be detailed into confidential policy making positions and attorney general appointments such as immigration judges and members of the board of immigration appeals.

I also interviewed requests for waivers of hiring freezes imposed on districts with an outgoing U.S. attorney or an interim or acting U.S. attorney. In every case, I tried to act in good faith and for the purpose of insuring that the department was staffed by well qualified individuals who were supportive of the attorney general's views, priorities and goals. Nevertheless I do acknowledge that I may have gone too far in asking political questions of applicants for career positions and I may have taken inappropriate political considerations into account on some occasions and I regret those mistakes.

In conclusion, I'd like to give the committee a little better sense of who I am because the person that I read about on the Internet and in the newspaper is not me. At heart I'm a fairly quiet person. I try to do the right thing and I try to treat people kindly along the way. I always knew that I wanted to grow up and do something to serve or help other people. I went to public schools growing up but I chose Christian universities in part because of the value that they place on service. I've seen in my life what violent crime can do to its victims and I knew that at some point I wanted to do my part to seek justice on their behalf. That's why I loved the Department of Justice, particularly my time as a prosecutor.

For the five years that I spent there I worked as hard as I could at whatever task that was put before me and I hope that's the reason that I was promoted five times during my time at the department. I considered the people that I worked with to be my family and I care about them deeply. I have no desire to say anything negative about anyone that I worked with, including the leadership team or the U.S. attorneys who are the subject of my testimony. But I'm here to be a fact witness to what I heard, saw, did or know, and I'll do that to the best of my recollection. Thank you for allowing me the time to make this statement. I'm prepared to answer your questions.

CONYERS: And I thank you for your statement. Let me begin. COLLINS: So there you have it. Monica Goodling, the former Justice Department liaison to the White House in her testimony before the House Judiciary hearing there regarding the fired U.S. attorneys, heard several interesting things. Let me go ahead and bring in our Kelli Arena, our Justice correspondent, to talk a little bit more about this. Kelli, several things here. Really interesting to me where she mentioned about halfway through or so that even though she did give reasons for certain attorneys to be replaced, she really is not sure whether or not those reasons that she provided ended up ultimately into firing of any particular U.S. attorney.

KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right and so she's basically heading them off at the pass saying look, I don't know why these people were ultimately put on the list. I gave my input, I'm not sure it was listened to. She cites one example where she mentioned two names which didn't end up on the list until months later and there were several lists in between where they did it. But you know Heidi, the thing that I think she said which caught my eye was that she does admit that she went too far in asking questions, politically motivated questions, of people who were applying for jobs at the Department of Justice and she says that she inappropriately took their political affiliations into account.

We know she's got immunity, but who else was aware of this? And did they turn a blind eye or did the department know what she was doing and is that a bigger situation that needs to be dealt with? That a very serious admission.

COLLINS: Yeah, that being said, she also explained that she did not hold the keys to the kingdom as some of these allegations have written about her in that way. When you look at what she said, though, what happens next? What sort of bearing will that have on this situation now at this point in history?

ARENA: Well, obviously that, you know, that admission that we just talked about is going to pique Congress's interest because you know that those allegations have been flying for a long time now that this department has been politicized in a way that career professionals who have been there decades say has never happened before. So that will be an area to pursue.

Also, right out of the gate, she goes and you know, shoots Paul McNulty, who the deputy attorney general who already offered his resignation will be leaving his job later this summer and said look, I don't think he was very candid about his role in this. He blamed me for not briefing him properly. I did my best. You know, Paul McNulty has managed to go through this process a little beat up, but really basically unscathed. When he did offer his resignation, the New York Senator Chuck Schumer said, well, you know, he's been very forthcoming. That may cause some lawmakers to maybe do a double-take, look into that. But he already said he's leaving so that may be an end to that.

COLLINS: Kelli, real quickly, any chance that anybody gets their job back by way of the U.S. attorneys that were fired? ARENA: You know, no. I really don't think so. Those people have moved on. Most of them have other jobs. It's said and done. Would you want it back? Not for me to say.

COLLINS: All right. CNN justice correspondent Kelli Arena for us today. Kelli, thank you.

HARRIS: Making the case to stay in Iraq. President Bush goes public with an alleged plot by Osama bin Laden, his commencement address to the Coast Guard Academy. See it live right here in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com