Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales has made misleading statements when explaining the firing of eight federal prosecutors, his former chief of staff told a Senate committee this morning in sworn testimony.

"I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions about U.S. attorney removals is accurate," said D. Kyle Sampson, who is testifying voluntarily today before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Mr. Gonzales said in a March 13 press conference that he "was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on."

Mr. Sampson resigned the day before Mr. Gonzales' press conference.

Mr. Sampson said he and Mr. Gonzales discussed the firings "before he became the attorney general, when he was the attorney general-designate in January of 2005 … then from time to time, as the process was sort of in a thinking phase through 2005 and 2006."

"The credibility of the attorney general on this issue has been more or less shattered by what happened in that hearing room," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, New York Democrat, during a midday briefing with reporters.

"His chief of staff contradicted what the attorney general said on repeated, important questions," Mr. Schumer said.

E-mails released in last week have shown that Mr. Gonzales attended a Nov. 27, 2006, meeting in which the firings were discussed, causing Mr. Gonzales to clarify his earlier statements.

But Mr. Sampson said that he and Mr. Gonzales had "at least five" conversations about the firings.

"I spoke with him every day," Mr. Sampson said.

Mr. Schumer asked Mr. Sampson if Mr. Gonzales had seen documents related to the firings, and Mr. Sampson said he did not remember giving any to the attorney general.

Mr. Sampson defended the firings themselves, saying they were "properly made but poorly explained" and said he resigned because he felt "honor bound to accept my share of the blame for this problem."

Mr. Sampson also said he advised Mr. Gonzales to circumvent the Senate's confirmation process for U.S. attorneys, using a portion of the U.S. Patriot Act that was inserted in the law's 2006 renewal.

"That was a bad idea," Mr. Sampson said. "I did advocate that idea at times ... It was never adopted by the attorney general. It was rejected by the attorney general. He thought it was a bad idea."

The Senate and House both voted overwhelmingly last week to eliminate the attorney general's power to appoint interim U.S. attorneys with open-ended terms.

-- Jon Ward, White House correspondent, The Washington Times