WASHINGTON — After three months of congressional hearings into the firing of U.S. attorneys, one thing became clear Wednesday: Partisan politics did play a role in Justice Department personnel decisions.
But lawmakers, who have heard from an array of young political functionaries to the U.S. attorney general himself, still do not know the extent of it.
The parade of Justice Department officials wrapped up Wednesday with the testimony of Monica M. Goodling, 33, a graduate of an evangelical Christian law school whose meteoric rise to the top of the Bush Justice Department crashed and burned this spring when she resigned and hired a lawyer.
She was senior counsel to Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales and was his liaison to the White House.
After weeks of wrangling about the ground rules for her appearance, Goodling -- testifying under a grant of immunity from prosecution -- acknowledged that she had taken into account the political leanings of applicants for jobs at the Justice Department, including career prosecutors and immigration judges. That may have violated federal civil service laws, and Goodling conceded she may have "crossed the line."
The admission, before a packed House Judiciary Committee hearing, was the strongest evidence yet of Bush administration wrongdoing turned up by congressional investigators. For Democrats, it confirmed suspicions about the depths of politicization at the Justice Department under Gonzales.
But still fiercely disputed is the core question of whether officials were systematically assessing U.S. attorneys' fidelity to administration political goals and easing out those found wanting, as Democrats and some of the fired attorneys suspect.
The hearings have failed to produce support for Democrats' most provocative theories: that the firings were driven by a desire to find U.S. attorneys who would pursue legal action -- in voting fraud or public corruption matters -- in ways that would help Republican candidates.
Now, with Goodling and other Justice officials denying they knew of any such motives, Democrats are turning to the White House for answers. That path could be highly problematic.
The administration has declined to provide unfettered access to the likes of political operative Karl Rove and former White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers. Lawmakers are threatening to issue subpoenas for documents and testimony. The matter could be headed for court.
