lkmcgann May 29, 2007, 11:51 AM

Congressional Democrats have been wary of dropping the “s” word so far in the simmering Justice Department probe.

Despite indications of possible criminal wrongdoing, Democrats have not called for a special prosecutor (necessary, given the inherent conflict of interest at the Justice Department). It looks like the majority party is holding out for the smoking gun.

That gun will probably lead to peripheral charges, Roll Call reports today:

“Obstruction, perjury, false statements —that’s always how these things get started,” said ethics attorney and former House counsel Stan Brand.

Brand pointed to the Watergate defendants, many of whom were charged with similar crimes.

“There were not many substantial offenses charged in most cases. That was a cover-up,” he said.

The strongest aroma has wafted off the Monica Goodling and Paul McNulty standoff. McNulty has reportedly told Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) that, in preparation briefings for his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Goodling withheld information about the White House’s roles in the firings from him. And Goodling claimed last week in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee that McNulty knew more about the U.S. Attorneys firings than he claimed during his testimony. McNulty flatly denies Goodlings accusation.

Three of the fired U.S. attorneys have also testified that they received calls from Michael Elston, chief of staff to the deputy attorney general, with the implicit threat to stay quiet about the firings or risk the reasons for their dismissals being made public.

Prosecutor-turned-politician Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) described the possible criminal violations that have surfaced so far saying:

“It is surprising how often a whiff of obstruction of justice has reared its head in the course of this investigation.”

Let’s see how long just a “whiff” lasts.

U.S. Attorneys