Exercise Extreme Caution when using many of our free forms - or any legal material. While they may provide general ideas on format & content, validity requirements can and do vary greatly from state to state. Many MUST be Properly Modified for your own location and circumstances. (Hint: If in doubt it's usually safer to include unneeded clauses than to leave out necessary ones. . . . but it's even safer to consult a competent source or use current, state specific ones like ours mentioned below.) Also, we urge people (and lawyers too) to read our Relying On Legal Info FAQ.
The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Gonzales:
At the hearing last Thursday and again in a letter dated April 25, 2007, I asked you whether you would provide Karl Rove's e-mails in the possession of the Justice Department to the Committee without a subpoena. His lawyer stated publicly that these emails, many of which have been reported "lost", were turned over to U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as part of the investigation into the leak of the identity of a covert CIA officer by officials in the Administration that led to the conviction of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. You responded at the hearing that you did not know but would check and get back to me. I have not heard back from you since in response to my question or the letter.
Attached please find a subpoena compelling the Department by May 15 to produce any and all emails and attachments to emails to, from, or copied to Karl Rove related to the Committee's investigation into the preservation of prosecutorialindependence and the Department of Justice's politicization of the hiring and firing and decision-making of United States Attorneys, from any (1) White House account, (2) Republican National Committee account, or (3) other account, in the possession, custody or control of the Department of Justice. This subpoena includes any such emails that were obtained by Mr. Fitzgerald as part of the Plame investigation.
I continue to hope that the Department will cooperate with the Committee's investigation, but it is troubling that significant documents highly relevant to the Committee's inquiry have not been produced, such as a confidential order revealed yesterday by the press that you issued in March 2006 delegating to two of your aides, former Chief of Staff D. Kyle Sampson and former White House Liaison Monica Goodling, authority over the hiring and firing of most political employees of the Justice Department.
Indeed, despite multiple requests for the Department to produce documents voluntarily related to the Committee's investigation into the mass firings of U.S. Attorneys and politicization at the Department, the Department's production of documents has been selective and incomplete. Many documents have been withheld or redacted without any legal basis being set forth. In addition, to date, the Department has yet to provide the Committee with the precise scope of the production, any assurance that a preservation order was issued to prevent the loss or destruction of documents, and a complete privilege log that provides the basis for withholdings and redactions. In document productions and interviews with Department employees, the Department continues to insist on providing information within only a highly limited scope inconsistent with the Committee's inquiry and over the Committee's objection.
I look forward to your compliance with the Judiciary Committee's subpoena by the May 15 return date. I also ask for an immediate response to and full compliance with the outstanding requests for information by the Committee and its members to avoid further subpoenas.
The Current Page is:
Senate Judiciary Committee Supboena of Karl Rove's Email