WASHINGTON — When he testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee today, D. Kyle Sampson will accept responsibility for the Justice Department's mishandling of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, which has escalated into a political scandal for the White House.

In his three-page statement obtained by the Deseret Morning News late Wednesday, Sampson takes the blame for the "ugly, undignified spectacle" that erupted out of what he contends were justifiable forced terminations.

In advance of Sampson's testimony, the Justice Department released more documents Wednesday to show that Sampson was to blame for contradictory statements made to Congress.

But Sampson, a Utah native and a rising star in Washington before he abruptly resigned as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' chief of staff earlier this month, says any contradictions in information presented to Congress were unintentional.

"The mistakes I made here were made honestly and in good faith," Sampson said in his prepared statement. "I never sought to conceal or withhold any material fact about this matter from anyone."

The Justice Department fired eight U.S. attorneys last year, and when Congress asked about what led to the terminations, department officials defended the actions as performance-based and said the decisions on who should leave did not involve the White House.

But department documents later released to the House and Senate judiciary committees showed e-mails that have Sampson discussing with then-White House counsel Harriet Miers the plan to fire the attorneys and that have White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove initially asking about the process for getting rid of attorneys after Bush won re-election in 2004.

Testimony from the fired U.S. attorneys led some lawmakers — mainly Democrats — to allege the requested resignations were not entirely warranted while Republicans insisted that the attorneys, like all appointees, serve at the pleasure of the president.

Once Congress began to ask about the firings, Sampson believes "the department's response was badly mishandled," according to his testimony.

"It was mishandled through an unfortunate combination of poor judgments, poor word choices, and poor communication and preparation for the department's testimony before Congress," according to Sampson's prepared remarks. "What started as a good faith attempt to carry out the department's management responsibilities and exercise the President's appointment authority has unfortunately resulted in confusion, misunderstanding and embarrassment. This should have not happened."