Revised 10/12/00


Another project initiated by Freeper Yellow Rose of Texas!


Washington Post - Campaign Finance Key Player: Henry Waxman "…Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) is the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, the House committee investigating campaign finance abuses. He is neither a fan of the committee's chairman, Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.), nor of the investigation itself, which he said in July 1997 was in "complete disarray, and is facing a meltdown. ... It's time to end the House investigation and let the Senate do the job." …"

"…Here are a few excerpts taken directly from the web page of the Democratic Socialists of America. (Italicized emphasis provided) "The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA's members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics. "At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means and end. We are activists committed not only to extending political democracy but to demanding democratic empowerment in the economy, in gender relations, and in culture. Democracy is not simply one of our political values but our means of restructuring society. Our vision is of a society in which people have a real voice in the choices and relationships that affect the entirety of our lives. We call this vision democratic socialism - a vision of a more free, democratic and humane society. We are socialists because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo. We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources, meaningful work, a healthy environment, sustainable growth, gender and racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships." ….The web site boasts the creation of the "Progressive Caucus" in Congress, as well as the coalition that is working to promote the socialist agenda in Congress. Congressional Members of the Progressive Caucus… Rep Henry A. Waxman (CA-29) …."



Insight Jennifer G. Hickey "....The Chung testimony resurrected concern that contributions to the Clinton-Gore campaign from China's intelligence services were to buy influence for the Beijing government. His detailed account of his role in the 1996 campaign-finance scandal was, scandal watchers are saying, a smoking gun....Although repeatedly delayed, the testimony of the former busboy and Democratic Party fund-raiser who visited the Clinton White House on more than 50 occasions began on a political note when Chung lit into the reluctance of the congressional panel to approve campaign-finance reform. According to a Capitol Hill staffer, it was as if Al Capone had been brought to Washington to lecture congressmen on the need for better laws against bootlegging...... And the DNC's need of Chung is eloquently evidenced in a Nov. 10, 1995, memo from the DNC's Ari Swiller, asking DNC chairman Don Fowler to call Chung concerning a donation he was to make. "Johnny committed to contribute $75,000 to the DNC at the reception in Los Angeles on September 21. He has still not sent his contribution. Tell him if he does not complete his commitment ASAP bad things will happen," said the memo. It looked like an offer Chung couldn't refuse..... Perhaps it was summarized best by U.S. District Judge Manuel Real of Los Angeles in his sentencing of Chung: "If Mr. [former DNC chairman Don] Fowler and Mr. [DNC finance chairman Richard] Sullivan didn't know what was going on, I think they are the dumbest politicians I've ever seen.".....From the get-go, however, ranking member Waxman tried to make the issue Chung's character rather than corruption of the DNC and the Clinton-Gore campaign. Democrats on the committee were shocked, shocked, that bribery was afoot and took Chung to the woodshed..... A final footnote involves the case of James Parish, a 16-year veteran of the State Department who worked at the American Embassy in Beijing from 1994 to 1996. Parish met Chung when the latter brought a Mr. He, the head of Haomen Beer, to the embassy to assist in getting He's visa renewed. Chung swears Parish arranged visas for dozens of individuals for whom Chung was getting invitations to the United States and, in return, Chung got Parish into a VIP reception with Clinton, trained Parish's secretary in computer skills and spent $7,000 to $8,000 on seven students Parish knew who wanted to be educated in the United States. Chung says this relationship ended when He asked Chung to take a "shopping bag full of money and visas" to Parish....."



Martha Perske and Sara Mahler 1/2/96 "…Congressman Henry Waxman apparently thinks he can misrepresent the contents of a public document and get away with it. That is exactly what he seems to have done in his formal summation, dated November 15, 1995, in response to the new report on environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) that he, himself, had requested from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), a nonpartisan branch of the Library of Congress. ("Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer Risk," by C. Stephen Redhead, Analyst in Life Sciences and Richard E. Rowberg, Senior Specialist in Science and Technology, Science Policy Research Division, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, November 14, 1995.) Contrary to Waxman's claims, the CRS report shows that the studies on ETS are plagued with so many uncertainties that one cannot claim any clear finding of a public health hazard from ETS. We shall present Waxman's claims and juxtapose them with actual quotes from the CRS report. You will see that he appears to thoroughly distort what the CRS really said. *


WAXMAN: "The new (CRS) report vindicates the conclusions of the Environmental Protection Agency. It shows that secondhand tobacco smoke is a dangerous human lung carcinogen."

CRS: " is possible that very few or even no deaths can be attributed to ETS." (p. 55) "...if there are any lung cancer deaths from ETS exposure, they are likely to be concentrated among those subjected to the (highest) exposure levels...primarily among those nonsmokers subjected to significant spousal ETS." (p. 53) CRS explains, however, that even at the highest exposure levels, "the measured risks are still subject to uncertainty." (p. 2). Contrary to the EPA's conclusion (referenced on page 1 of the report), the CRS says that the chemical similarities between mainstream smoke and side stream smoke (the major component of ETS) "do not prove the relationship" between lung cancer and ETS "since ETS is substantially diluted and aged compared to even low levels of active smoking." (p. 19) * * * * * * * *


WAXMAN: "Since the release of the 1993 EPA report classifying ETS as a human lung carcinogen, there have been four major new studies of ETS. Three of the four studies report a statistically significant increase in lung cancer rates at the highest exposure levels." Waxman claims this is a "major finding" of the CRS report.

CRS: "...even at the (highest) exposure levels, the measured risks are still subject to uncertainty." (p. 2) "...smoker misclassification could explain all the measured risk even at high exposure levels..." (pp. 40, 41) * * * * * * * *


WAXMAN: "Using data from the recently completed Fontham study, the CRS calculated that the range of annual lung cancer deaths from exposure to ETS is 470 to 5,500 with a mean value of 2,780 -- virtually the same level of deaths estimated by the EPA."

CRS: The figures mentioned by Waxman, based on the Fontham study, were simply cited by the CRS, followed closely by the statement that "Data from the Brownson et al. study, on the other hand, produce no annual lung cancer deaths from ETS also under the no-threshold assumption." (p.2) "In the final Fontham study, a small adjustment (for smoker misclassification) could render the overall Fontham results statistically insignificant at the 95 percent level." (pp. 24, 25) "...simulated calculations indicate that misclassification can be a potent uncertainty in these ETS (epidemiologic) studies, and could account for the measured risks values." (p. 3)* * * * * * *


WAXMAN: "The lung cancer risks from exposure to ETS are EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH." (emphasis added) Again, Waxman claims that this is a "major finding" of the CRS report.

CRS: "Even when overall risk is considered it is a very SMALL risk and is not statistically significant at a conventional 95 percent level." (emphasis added) (p. 25) * * * * * * * *


WAXMAN: "The tobacco industry has long argued the ETS is not dangerous because there is a "threshold" level of exposure below which there is no risk of lung cancer."

CRS: "...the possibility cannot be ruled out that a threshold level does exist if there is a real effect from ETS." (p. 31) It should be pointed out that by citing numbers (risk estimates), Waxman appears to have done exactly what the CRS warned against. The purpose of presenting these numbers was " NOT (CRS underlining) to compute a definitive number of lung cancer deaths which may result from ETS, but rather to illustrate the effect of various factors...on those numbers." (p. 47) Had the CRS report come out the way Congressman Waxman would have liked, surely he would have issued a press release -- and this would have been a lead story for many days. As it stands, the mainstream media keeps right on headlining stories about the "dangers" of ETS as if the CRS report doesn't exist. Shouldn't Waxman, who seems so eager to grill others about misrepresenting the tobacco issue, be grilled himself for what appears to be a blatant misrepresentation of the CRS report? …"


7/15/96 Washington Weekly "…The House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight lastweek started hearings into alleged ties between the Clinton administration and Mob-controlled labor unions. Union boss Arthur E. Coia of the Laborers' International Union has close ties to several Mob leaders, and has been under investigation by the FBI for Mob-influenced racketeering. The Clinton Justice Department, however, settled the RICO suit against Coia on terms that were very favorable to Coia. The law firm defending Coia, Williams and Conolly, is the same law firm defending Clinton against Whitewater charges. Republicans allege that the Clinton administration let Coia off the hook because of his generous campaign contributions. Coia was recently seen as aco-chairman of a Democratic fundraiser, and Hillary Clinton had her picture taken with him. "There is a pattern," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey last week, "when the Justice Department reaches a settlement with the Laborers International Union and leaves its president, Arthur Coia, in charge rather than proceed with racketeering charges against an organization that supports President Clinton." Democrats on the committee attacked Republicans for partisanship. "It's hard for me to see how this hearing isn't part of a political agenda," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. He may have other motives than protecting the President, however. An investigation by the Washington Weekly reveals that Henry Waxman has taken money from Laborers' International Union. In accordance with the charge by Democrats last week that Bob Dole is in the pocket of the Tobacco Industry, one might say that Henry Waxman is in the pocket of the Mob.

10/9/97 NewsHour Transcript "….The House finally began hearing testimony from witnesses looking into the work of DNC donor "Charlie" Yah Lin Trie. In the Senate, the committee began exploring the connection between the DNC and Ron Carey's run for the president of the Teamsters Union. The Online Explainers take your question on the investigation. The NewsHour's coverage of the Congressional Investigation. The inside stories on the political fight behind the public investigation. The investigation is big news in Washington, but how's it playing around the country. A closer look at the issues really under scrutiny by the Congress….. REP. DAN BURTON: While I’m disappointed that this hearing will not be televised, we believe the American people have the right to know what these witnesses have to say. KWAME HOLMAN: But once the cameras left the room Manlin Fong said she knew little about her brother’s business practices and nothing about his political activities. She said she made contributions to the DNC simply because he asked her to. Landon gave similar answers. Well aware of what the witnesses would say based on their earlier depositions the committee’s top Democrat, Henry Waxman, questioned the need to hear from them since the Thompson committee on the Senate side had heard the same stories from similar witnesses three months ago. REP. HENRY WAXMAN, (D) California: There is nothing in their deposition that ads to the knowledge to what Sen. Thompson uncovered in his July 19 hearing. KWAME HOLMAN: and as for the third witness, David Wang, Waxman accused him of giving false testimony because in his deposition Wang claimed to have meet with DNC fund-raiser John Huang on a day when records show Huang actually was three thousand miles away. REP. HENRY WAXMAN: It is now clear that David Wang never should have received immunity. He has repeatedly misled this committee and Chairman Burton and his staff and our staff. The essence of his testimony appeared to be a fiction. …"

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WASHINGTON, D.C. In the matter of: : FBI FILES : DEPOSITION OF CRAIG LIVINGSTONE Tuesday, September 24, 1996 Washington, D.C. The deposition in the above matter was held in Room 2203, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 10:30 a.m. "…

Mr. Burton. Let me say something, Henry. You and I are here if we want to ask questions, but this fellow is here to defend Mr. Livingstone and to raise objections, not you or I. We are here to ask questions. I don't know why you are deliberately trying to slow down the process.

Mr. Waxman. I am not trying to slow down the process. I want to be sure that the process is a fair process and within the scope of the rules and I don't feel that we have delegated that completely to Ms. Olson to determine, because this is a decision for the Members.

Mr. Burton. When I came in, I did nothing but ask questions and I tried to do so in an orderly manner. I think that the same thing should apply to all Members of Congress who come here. I don't think we should try to stop the process and I think that's what you are trying to do.

Mr. Waxman. I am not trying to stop the process.

Mr. Burton. Let her ask the questions.

Mr. Waxman. I will let her ask the questions, but I want her to stay within the scope of the inquiry.

Mr. Burton. By whose definition of scope? You see, Henry, you are defining what the scope ought to be.

Mr. Waxman. I think you are right. The scope is to be determined by the Members if there is a dispute as to the scope.

Mr. Burton. I have no objection to you asking any questions you want, Henry, and ask the questions, but to stay here -- you are an obstruction to getting through this process.

Mr. Waxman. I certainly do not seek to be an obstructionist in getting through this process. I know everybody wants to complete the deposition. Mr. Livingstone has been here for many, many hours. I just want to be sure that the questions are related to the investigation and we don't go far afield…."


LA Weekly, 11/1/96 "…The ablest liberal legislator of the ‘80s and ‘90s (his only peer, in the other House, is Ted Kennedy), Waxman was at it again in the waning months of the Gingrich Congress, amassing enough votes to force reluctant Republicans to sign on to legislation strengthening drinking-water standards and toxic protections." --


The Almanac of American Politics, 1998 "…Waxman had less success on reforming national health care when the issue came out in the open. He wanted to move to something like a single-payer, government-paid program and supported the Clinton plan, but to no avail…."

5/13/98 The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer Transcript Republican Dan Burton, chairman of the House Government Reform & Oversight Committee, tried again today to get his committee to approve immunity for four potential witnesses. The committee voted and failed, once again, to reach the 2/3 needed to grant immunity. Kwame Holman has the story. ….KWAME HOLMAN: But Democrats wanted to debate what they contend is Burton's abuse of power as committee chairman. Just this week, Henry Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the committee, called for Burton to step down as chairman. REP. HENRY WAXMAN, (D) California: There's never been an investigation where the chairman has asserted the kind of power that Chairman Burton has. And there's never been an investigation that's been so plagued by mistakes, raw partisanship, and wrong judgments. What we have is an investigation out of control and without credibility, voting for immunity today, without adopting any changes in the rules on how this committee operates, which has worsened the problem. KWAME HOLMAN: Waxman urged Republicans to take back the broad decision-making powers given to Burton at the start of the investigation. REP. JOHN MICA, (R) Florida: It's not his investigation. It's our investigation. Bring the power back to the committee members. And, secondly, another senior Republican member of this committee should be appointed to head this investigation. KWAME HOLMAN: Waxman tried to get a vote on his proposals, but Chairman Burton wouldn't entertain the motion. REP. DAN BURTON: The gentleman was recognized for an opening statement only, and the chair will not recognize the gentleman for the purpose of the amendment he proposes. KWAME HOLMAN: It's very unlikely Waxman's proposals would have succeeded since member after member of the committee's Republican majority came to Burton's defense. REP. JOHN MICA: Every member of Congress should be personally offended by the undeserved sliming of the chairman of this committee and other committee members. Fortunately, Mr. Chairman, history, facts, and our judicial system will prevail…."

5/13/98 Chris Roseborough The Voice of a Few Americans "… On Tuesday Congressman Burton revealed that 90 witnesses that are sought for questioning in Clinton's campaign finance investigation have either fled the country or pleaded the fifth. Waxman fired back at Burton that evening on the Newshour with Jim Lehrer by emphatically stating "That's a number he's just made up. It's not that many." When questioned concerning Waxman's statement, John Williams, press secretary for Congressman Burton pointed out "that a list of the names of all 90 witnesses has been available on the House's web-site for some time." ( An unnamed spokesman for Congressman Waxman when asked if Mr. Waxman was ready to rescind his statement in light of the published list, contended that "some of the names were made up by the Republicans." When asked which names were "made-up" he said that information is still forth-coming…."

12/7/98 -- Linda Seebach is an editorial writer for the Denver Rocky Mountain News "…The contention of the report is that the conversion of official White House records to the use of the DNC may constitute the theft of government property, as may the time of government employees and the use of government property such as computer time and storage. The committee cites the similar case of one Peter Collins, who was convicted of using government office supplies to support the U.S. Amateur Ballroom Dancing Association. Any administration collects information that would be of enormous value to party fund raising, from White House guest lists to mailing lists for holiday cards. But the principle has been that it can't be distributed in that way. Early on, that was the Clinton administration's position too. Cheryl Mills, then associate counsel to the president, wrote in a memo dated Jan. 17, 1994, "Once White House employees integrate information provided by any source into the database system, it becomes government property . . . (and) may be provided to a source outside the federal government only for authorized purposes."….. It didn't take long for the White House to come around to the DNC's way of thinking. A June 28, 1994, memo from Marsha Scott, a staff member in the White House Office of Political Affairs, to Harold Ickes and Bruce Lindsey (with a copy to Hillary Rodham Clinton) describes a new White House Database (WhoDB) to be integrated with the campaign. "By the first of the year (1995) we should have any flaws identified and corrected and the majority of the White House using the system. We will then have a year (until 1996) to fully train and familiarize our folks to its many possibilities and uses," she wrote…."

12/8/98 TPDL 1998-Dec-8, syndicated by Nando Media and Scripps Howard, by Linda Seebach McIntosh Report Startles Congress "…A House subcommittee has issued a report on its probe of allegedly illegal use of the White House Big Brother computer. Will it be a linchpin in any Clinton impeachment? It reads like a prosecutorial memorandum. And like any good crime drama, the narrative carries a punch that knocks the wind out of you. But judge for yourself the opening chapter in the case of the mysterious White House Office Data Base, or WHODB.

"The story of the White House Database is one about a White House that disregarded the difference between the official business of the United States government and the political business of reelecting the president. Because the line between official business and campaigning was obliterated, this president and his White House subordinates proceeded to spend at least $1.7 million of government funds on a complex, centralized computer system known as the White House [Office] Database, or 'WHODB.' It was used not just for official purposes; senior White House staff planned and, in fact, used it to advance the campaign fundraising objectives of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). This conversion of government property to the use of the DNC constitutes a theft of government property under 18 U.S.CV. [sec] 641…..So begins the exhaustively detailed 93-page summary report of a two-year probe by Rep. David McIntosh, an Indiana Republican and chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs. The panel's findings, released Oct. 12, wrapped up a probe that began after Insight published an investigative exposé, beginning in July 1996, on a then-secret taxpayer-funded computer system at the White House alleged to have been misused for political and campaign purposes…..In fact, McIntosh's subcommittee already has sent to Attorney General Janet Reno referrals involving potential perjury and obstruction of justice against a senior White House lawyer (see news alert!, Oct. 19) and possibly other administration aides……

Here's why. Beginning with the second paragraph [page 54], the McIntosh report states: "The committee believes that the president's involvement in the conversion of the White House into a fundraising tool represents an abuse of power. The president is entrusted with the conservation of the White House as a national landmark. The scheme to transfer data from the White House Database and other data sources supported the overall objective of using White House invitations to accomplish political fundraising goals." In yet stronger language, the majority report concludes that "the president and the first lady were involved in the unlawful conversion of government property to the use of the DNC and the Clinton/Gore campaign."….

McIntosh, who has been castigated by Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee (see sidebar below), offers no reason why the press has shunned his panel's careful work. Rather than complain, McIntosh and his small staff have assembled a powerful case narrative that they believe shows a reckless pattern of misappropriation of public funds, perjury, obstruction of justice and a conspiracy both to misuse the taxpayer- funded computer system and to mislead investigators -- all of this to protect the White House and the president…..

In his minority report on the White House Office Database, Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat and the ranking member of the McIntosh subcommittee, strongly disagrees that the White House either misused the WHODB system, caused government property to be stolen or otherwise engaged in a theft of such property. Moreover, Waxman strenuously argues in a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno that she should disregard criminal referrals from the panel involving Cheryl Mills, a deputy counsel to the president whom McIntosh believes committed perjury and obstruction.

In the opening paragraph of his 20-page executive summary, Waxman and the Democrats state the minority position as follows: "The majority report accuses the president, the first lady, senior White House staff, and DNC employees of theft of government property. These conclusions are extraordinary. Simply put, the record does not support an allegation of theft. It is not theft to remove duplicate addresses from the president's holiday card list so that recipients do not receive duplicate cards. It is not theft to answer an inquiry as to whether an individual has attended an event at the White House. Yet, at bottom, this is the type of evidence the majority cites as support for its conclusions."

1998 American Civil Liberties Union reports Henry Waxman voted with them 86% of the time.

New York Times 5/11/99 "....Recounting a tale of intrigue with mysterious meetings at smoky restaurants, hotel lounges and karaoke bars in Hong Kong, the fund-raiser, Johnny Chung, provided his first public account of his experiences, from 1994 to 1996, as he traveled the Far East prospecting for business clients eager for access to the Clinton Administration..... It was the Democrats from Chung's party who turned on Chung, bitterly denouncing him as an untrustworthy witness. "You've had your 15 minutes, Mr. Chung," said Representative Tom Lantos, Democrat of California. "You are a very minor, insignificant puppet of the Communist regime." Representative Henry Waxman, Democrat of California, accused Chung of providing the authorities with misleading accounts of his dealings with Hazel O'Leary, the former Energy Secretary, and Margaret Williams, a former White House aide, who were investigated before they were cleared of wrongdoing. Chung said that after investigators focused on him, he was offered money to keep him from cooperating with Federal authorities and was introduced to a Los Angeles lawyer, David E. Brockway, who Chung said would help him if he kept his silence. But after Tuesday's hearing, the lawyer denied Chung's account. "He's a huckster and a hustler," Brockway said in a telephone interview. "It's a lie." ..."

The New Australian 5/24/99 Peter Zhang No 120 ".... The regime has a dossier on every American Senator and Congressman. Everyone of them has been politically profiled. Beijing knows which ones will spring to Clinton's defence, even in the present climate. One such man is Democrat Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California. He claimed that there is no evidence that the DNC or Clinton knew certain funds were illegal and originated with Chinese intelligence. Readers will no doubt note that he did not say no one knew, only that no one can prove, at least at this stage, that anyone knew. He has obviously been taking linguistic lessons from your president. I raised Waxman because his political profile predicted his response. He is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America who are committed to implementing the kind of policies that killed millions of Chinese and Russians. To these people capitalism is evil and America is the leading capitalist state. It follows that anything that weakens America is to be welcomed if not actually defended. Beijing's profiles are rarely wrong and that is why they are perfectly happy with the likes of Waxman and Reno. But where does that leave the American people?..."

The Washington Times 8/9/99 Editorial "… Given the extent of the scandal, which included efforts by some of Chung's Chinese friends to divert missile technology from a U.S. corporation desperately eager to do business with China and headed by the Democratic Party's largest individual contributor, Democratic officials have become obsessed with blocking various investigations. Chung has accused Attorney General Janet Reno, who has stubbornly refused to seek the appointment of an independent counsel, of "sitting on the information" he has given her. Chung also has asserted that the Democratic minority on the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee sent his attorney an unsolicited package of materials explaining "how you take the Fifth in the United States Congress" after Chung was subpoenaed to testify. Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Dan Burton, citing a letter addressed to him from Miss Reno but delivered to ranking Democrat Henry Waxman within minutes of a telephone conversation between Miss Reno and Mr. Burton, convincingly argues that Miss Reno had been working in concert with the committee's Democratic minority to thwart its investigation. Mr. Burton also accuses Miss Reno of keeping case after case open to prevent his committee from interrogating witnesses. Jerry Seper of The Washington Times reported this week that Democratic obstructionist actions included telling White House Deputy Counsel Bruce Lindsey to make himself unavailable for a deposition to which the Government Reform and Oversight Committee had subpoenaed him. Mr. Waxman told Mr. Burton that he had advised Mr. Lindsey to be "not available for this deposition." During the deposition of another White House official, the minority counsel raised 49 objections, and in another deposition Democrats sought to prevent a witness from answering questions from the majority counsel despite the witness' willingness to do so. In another deposition, Mr. Waxman attempted to prevent questions about convicted felon Webster Hubbell, the former associate attorney general who received $200,000 in consulting fees from Lippo Group, the Indonesia-based conglomerate that was the source of nearly $500,000 in illegal contributions from the Wiriadinata family…."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 8/16/99 Joyce Howard Price "…A senior Democratic aide to the House Committee on Government Reform denies Democrats tried to influence former fund-raiser Johnny Chung to plead the Fifth Amendment in his testimony before that panel in 1997…. Mr. O'Reilly said yesterday the "Democratic response" to Chung's charges "goes on to say that, 'Yes, we did send him the information, but they asked us to send it.' " But if that were the case, Mr. O'Reilly said, why didn't the Democrats alert Rep. Dan Burton, Indiana Republican and the committee's chairman, that they had done this? Mr. Burton doesn't buy the Democrats' explanation. In a tape also shown yesterday on "Fox News Sunday," he said, "If Mr. Chung's allegations are true, this is one of the most outrageous and partisan actions by a member of Congress and staff that I have ever seen. "To think that a member would encourage a witness to obstruct the investigation is unfathomable. We need to get to the bottom of this," the chairman said. In the Fox interview, Chung described the material sent to his attorney's office this way: "It said how you can plead, how you can take the Fifth in the United States Congress." ….And while committee Democrats insist they were not trying to keep Chung from testifying, Chung tells a different story in the interview, Mr. O'Reilly said. "Chung's saying flat-out: The Democrats, Henry Waxman, did not want me to talk," the Fox show's host added. Mr. Waxman of California is the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee. Chung visited the White House 57 times and gave $366,000 to Democrats between 1994 and 1996. Twenty of those visits came after a White House national security official described him as a "hustler" trying to turn high-level government contacts into business opportunities…..Chung's cooperation with both the Burton committee and the Justice Department's campaign-finance task force was monitored by Chinese intelligence officials…."

Judicial Watch 8/16/99 Larry Klayman "…Following appearances before Judicial Watch and the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, Johnny Chung is slated to give an interview this evening on Fox News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor (8:00 p.m. Eastern) in which he will finger Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman in an apparent scheme to obstruct justice. Following The O'Reilly Factor, Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman will appear on Hannity and Colmes (9:00 pm Eastern) with video of John Huang and Johnny Chung's sworn deposition testimony showing additional occurrences of obstruction of justice, this time by President Clinton and his Justice Department. "Based on all of the available evidence, it appears there is a widespread conspiracy orchestrated by the Clinton Administration to prevent justice in the Chinagate scandals," said Klayman…."

Washington Times 8/18/99 Jerry Seper "…Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee sought for two years to delay and obstruct the panel's campaign-finance investigation, even telling a top White House aide to make himself unavailable for a deposition to which he had been subpoenaed, according to congressional records. The documents, reviewed in the wake of accusations this week by former Democratic fund-raiser Johnny Chung that he was coached on how to plead the Fifth Amendment before a 1997 appearance before the committee, outline a suspected plan by Democrats to block the committee's ongoing probe. Republicans have begun an investigation to determine what role Democrats played in trying to protect the White House against accusations of campaign-finance abuses….."The Democratic minority counsel has acted as defense attorneys for a whole list of would-be witnesses, trying to scare them into not testifying," said the committee's spokesman, Mark Corallo. "They didn't have to come right out and blatantly tell the witnesses not to testify, but they certainly set a tone of fear and intimidation. "They made no effort to find out the truth of whether campaign-finance abuses during the 1996 election compromised our national-security system," he said…..But Republicans said yesterday that committee records, including depositions of key witnesses and numerous letters written concerning the panel's inquiry, document GOP concerns that committee Democrats and their attorneys sought to delay the depositions, intimidate would-be witnesses and obstruct the investigation. They said the committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, wrote in an April 3, 1998, letter to committee Chairman Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, that he was "disappointed" the deposition of White House Deputy Counsel Bruce Lindsey -- a key figure in the campaign-finance probe -- had been scheduled during the spring recess. Mr. Waxman told the chairman that he had advised Mr. Lindsey to "not be available for this deposition" -- a suggestion roundly criticized by Republicans as an example of what they said were delaying tactics utilized by Democrats throughout the probe….."

Washington Times 8/18/99 Jerry Seper "…The committee records, copies of which were obtained by The Washington Times, show that: … - During the deposition of one White House official, minority counsel raised objections on 49 occasions, and that during another deposition, the Democrats sought to prevent a witness from answering questions by the majority counsel despite the witnesses' willingness to do so. -At some depositions, objections were raised directly by Mr. Waxman and Rep. Tom Lantos, California Democrat, both of whom challenged with some regularity the validity of questions asked by the majority counsel. During the deposition of one White House aide, Republicans said Mr. Waxman tried to prevent questions concerning former Justice Department official Webster L. Hubbell, a longtime friend of President and Mrs. Clinton. -Democrats sought to block committee efforts to subpoena records from state Democratic Party organizations, through which suspected illegal campaign funds had been funneled. Mr. Waxman argued there was no evidence of wrongdoing. Investigators later discovered that illegal donations had been routed to the state organizations….."

Judicial Watch 8/18/99 Larry Klayman "…Today, Judicial Watch will file a complaint before the House Ethics Committee, alleging, based on information disclosed by Johnny Chung, and expanded upon by The Washington Times, that Democrats, led by Congressman Henry Waxman of California, have obstructed Congressional investigations into Chinagate. Based on recent reports, Congressman Waxman also may be linked to a scheme to use the Internal Revenue Service to audit, harass and harm critics of the Clinton Adminisration. Judicial Watch will also ask the House Ethics Committee to look into this as well. Judicial Watch takes a particular interest in Congressman Waxman because of its California office in San Marino. If Judicial Watch is to represent the interests of Californians and Westerners, as well as all Americans, it cannot turn a blind eye to the conduct of Congressman Waxman and his friends…."

Judicial Watch 8/18/99 Tom Fitton Letter to Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, US House of Representatives "… Re: Complaint Against Congressman Henry Waxman and Involved Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee. Dear Committee:

On behalf of the American people and in the public interest, we hereby file a complaint against Congressman Henry Waxman of the 29th District of California. Judicial Watch is a public interest group dedicated to fighting government corruption.

In recent days there have been press reports on the Fox News Channel and in the Washington Times that Congressman Waxman and Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee have attempted to impede the free flow of testimony of a material witness, Johnny Chung, in the campaign finance/Chinagate scandals. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1, and incorporated by reference are the transcripts, a video clip, and press reports of these allegations.

Furthermore, recent press reports have suggested that Congressman Waxman may be one of the individuals, including, but not limited to, officials of the Democratic Party and the Clinton Administration, who have engaged in a scheme to use the Internal Revenue Service to audit, harass and harm critics of the Clinton Administration. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2, and incorporated by reference are press reports of these allegations.

If true, these reports on the campaign finance/Chinagate and IRS scandals would mean that Congressman Waxman has violated laws and rules that include, but are not limited to: 18 U.S.C.§§ 1505, 1502; House Rule XXIV, Code of Official Conduct, no.1; and The Code of Ethics for Government Employment, nos. 1, 2, 9 & 10. We therefore demand a full investigation on behalf of the American people.

In light of the fact that Chairman Dan Burton of the Government Reform Committee has continuously complained about Democrat obstruction of his investigation into the campaign finance/Chinagate scandals, and given his remarks yesterday evening on The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News (enclosed as part of Exhibit 1), it is clear that he should certify that he believes this information is submitted in good faith and warrants the review and consideration of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

Judicial Watch, Inc., certifies that it has provided an exact copy of this complaint and all attachments to Congressman Waxman and Chairman Burton.

Sincerely, JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. Larry Klayman…"

Original Sources 8/18/99 Mary Mostert "…. If the Democrats on the Committee that was trying to investigate the irregularities of the 1996 Campaign finance contributions to the Clinton-Gore campaign were blatantly blocking the investigation and trying to lead and/or block testimony of a key witness, that is, as O’Reilly bluntly pointed it, not merely a Campaign Finance problem - it’s major government corruption. Bill O’Reilly did an excellent job of trying to get to the bottom of this bombshell of a revelation in both his questions to Johnny Chung and in questions to Philip M. Schiliro, staff director for the Democrats on the Committee. In framing the questions to Schiliro, O’Reilly said: "The Democrats deny trying to impede Chung’s testimony and say that Chung’s attorney, Brian Sun, ASKED for the information about taking the Fifth and so it was sent. Counselor Sun’s office said that was ‘ludicrous.’" He then allowed Schiliro time to reply to "Johnny Chung’s accusation that the Democrats tried to convince him to take the 5th Amendment." …

O'Reilly: To continue now with counselor Philip Schiliro, of the Democratic side- 122 people have either fled or pled (the 5th Amendment) in this Chinese Campaign Finance thing. That’s why it looks so bad, Counselor and I have to tell you as a journalist I’m trying to be fair here. I understand what you are saying and I not calling you a liar, and I’m not saying you are not telling the truth - I don’t know who is telling the truth.

But, I do know that when 122 people either leave the country or refuse to testify, ANY APPEARANCE that the Democrats are helping people not testify is disturbing.

Schiliro: There is absolutely no evidence at all other than Mr. Chung’s statement which is factually incorrect, that Democrats have done that. We haven’t done that. It’s been in our interest to get people to testify to resolve this matter as quickly as possible and we’ve done that. The other point that you should know is that in this investigation Democrats have virtually no influence or power. All the unilateral decisions get to be made by Chairman Burton.

Editor’s Note: No evidence? Schiliro ADMITTED they sent the materials - that makes it the testimony of TWO witnesses that the until now unknown incident of the Democrats having unilateral association with the witnesses they were voting immunity against took place. Schiliro is saying, "So what?" He is not denying it happened.

O'Reilly: Let’s go now to Chairman Dan Burton, Chairman of the House Reform and Oversight Committee. How do you react to Counselor Schiliro? You didn’t know anything about this, right? About the Chung - that the Democrats sent him the stuff about the 5th Amendment. What’s your feeling on it?

Chairman Dan Burton:My feeling is that Mr. Chung had adequate counsel. Mr. Sun is a very fine attorney out on the West Coast and he understands very clearly what Mr. Chung’s 5th Amendment rights were. And for the Minority of my Committee to be sending information, apparently unsolicited, to Mr. Chung and his attorney telling them how to take the 5th Amendment appears to me to be obstructing our investigation. I think that’s totally improper.

O'Reilly: Who do you believe in this? Do you believe the Democrats would be foolish enough to send Chung information about the 5th Amendment without telling you - unsolicited? That seems to be a bad political move.

Chairman Dan Burton:Well, Mr. Chung was doing a lot of contributing to the Democratic National Committee and the President’s Re-election Committee. And, I think they saw him as a Democrat ally, but this Justice Department and Janet Reno I believe has been working in concert with Mr. Waxman to try to keep us from getting witnesses before the Committee. We have to have a two-thirds majority vote to give immunity to a witness to be able to have them testify. We have not been able to get Henry Waxman and the Democrats to work with us except on one occasion and that was after we made some very strong concessions to them.

The fact of the matter is they have worked with the Justice Department to block us every step of the way and I think Johnny Chung is verifying that on your program.

O'Reilly:Do you believe Chung?

Chairman Dan Burton:I do believe him.

O'Reilly:Do you believe what he told us?

Chairman Dan Burton:I do believe him, because this is not the first time that we have had this kind of problem. I was having Louis Freeh, Chuck LaBella and the Chief FBI agent before my Committee. One hour before I was going to have them testify before my Committee, Janet Reno called me and said SHE wanted to testify. I said, "We’re not prepared, Madame Attorney General, to have you testify. If you’d let us know a little earlier, we might have worked that out." When the Committee Meeting started less than an hour later Henry Waxman had a letter from her that was addressed to ME! That I had not even received! And, he read it saying she was really upset because I wouldn’t let her testify. She had to have written that letter in 45 minutes and get it to him, and it was addressed to me.

So, once again, the Justice Department and the Attorney General were working in concert with Mr. Waxman to block our investigation. And that is the modus operandi that has been going on.

O'Reilly:So, basically what you are saying is: Mr. Chung’s statements are correct that federal laws were broken by the President, the Vice-President, the First Lady, and Hazel O’Leary. That there’s a massive cover-up going on and its a situation that is totally out of control right now.

Chairman Dan Burton:Oh, I think it IS out of control. I’ve said for three years now that Janet Reno has been blocking for the President. She was supposed to appoint an independent counsel to investigate Campaign Finance. Chuck LaBella said she should. Louis Freeh, the head of the FBI said she should. The head of the FBI investigative team said she should. And, she didn’t DO it! She’s been blocking for the President.

She has not allowed us to talk to witnesses because she hides behind what she says is Grand Jury or 6E material. And, Johnny Chung is right. She sits on information and keeps the cases open because once the cases are closed I can bring those people before my committee. And I know for a fact that she has kept case after case open so I can’t get to the witnesses.

O'Reilly:Unbelievable! ….Perhaps the most blatant thing that Chung told us last night was that he handed Maggie Williams, Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff $50,000 IN THE WHITE HOUSE! She took it, looked in the envelope, and called up the White House mess, made a reservation so Chung and his party could go down and eat, and then the money went to the DNC (Democratic National Committee.)

Now, that’s CLEARLY against the law! You can’t DO that! But I haven’t heard anything about that other than a cursory thing here!

Chairman Dan Burton:Bill, we’ve talked about all these things over the past three YEARS! This is not an isolated case. The President was going to fund-raisers where very few people even spoke English and he knew that they were fund-raisers. And, a lot of those people were not Chinese-Americans. They were Chinese nationals. And, he knew that. He also tried to circumvent the campaign laws by talking about how to get soft money into the campaign when the candidates are not supposed to be involved in that in any way…."

Washington Times 8/19/99 Jerry Seper Audry Hudson "…

Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee, as part of a strategy to discourage witnesses with damaging information on campaign finance abuses, sought to intimidate a key witness with limited knowledge of English and U.S. customs during a 1997 deposition, congressional records show. The newest documentary evidence comes as the committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, lashed out at Republicans for what he called "a failure to conduct an effective investigation." But he made no effort in his precisely worded written statement to defend the committee's Democratic staff. The committee's Democratic lawyers have become a focus of an inquiry by Republicans, who want to know what role they played in trying to delay, impede or obstruct the committee's campaign finance probe. Investigators are trying to determine if the panel's Democratic lawyers were responsible for the 122 would-be witnesses who claimed their Fifth Amendment privilege or fled the country. A major focus of that inquiry is the Sept. 29, 1997, deposition of Manlin Foung, sister of former Democratic fund-raiser Charles Yah Lin Trie. The deposition, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times, shows that Democratic lawyer Kenneth Ballen warned Mrs. Foung that if she cooperated in the campaign finance probe, she would be brought to Washington to face television cameras in "a large room with . . . over 44 congressmen sitting there….Mr. Waxman retreated from a planned interview yesterday with The Washington Times, opting instead to submit his response in writing. He focused on the committee's chairman, Rep. Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, saying the investigation was an attempt to "shift blame for his failure to conduct an effective investigation to others."…. The one-page statement made no reference or defense of his staff's methods of investigation or whether they had intimidated witnesses. He did, however, take note of Mr. Burton's staff, saying its investigation was plagued by turmoil and turnover. "He rejected my offer in January 1997 to conduct a joint and bipartisan investigation, and it's probably difficult for him to face the fact that his investigation has no credibility and has been conducted in a partisan and reckless manner," Mr. Waxman said…..Mr. Waxman's staff sidestepped questions on whether the congressman's statement was lacking in issuing any defense of their activities…..."

HENRY A. WAXMAN (D-CA) Top Contributors
1 Assn of Trial Lawyers of America $10,000
2 National Assn of Letter Carriers $7,500
3 Service Employees International Union $7,000
4 American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $5,000
4 American Nurses Assn $5,000
4 American Optometric Assn $5,000
4 American Podiatry Assn $5,000
4 KidsPAC $5,000
4 Leadership 98 [Leadership PAC for Vice President Al Gore] $5,000
4 United Auto Workers $5,000
4 United Food & Commercial Workers Union $5,000
12 American Medical Assn $4,000
12 Joseph E Seagram & Sons $4,000
12 National Education Assn $4,000
15 National Assn Retired Federal Employees $3,000
16 American Society of Anesthesiologists $2,500
16 American Veterinary Medical Assn $2,500
18 American Federation of Govt Employees $2,000
18 Investment Co Institute $2,000
18 Laborers Union $2,000
18 National Assn of Realtors $2,000
18 Sempra Energy $2,000
18 Women's Alliance for Israel $2,000

The Washington Times: 8/20/99 "…A former White House official invoked his Fifth Amendment rights 28 times yesterday in refusing to testify during a rancorous House committee hearing on campaign finance abuses during the 1996 presidential election. Mark Middleton, an Arkansas lawyer and longtime confidant of President Clinton, steadfastly refused to answer questions by House Government Reform Committee Republicans on whether he conspired with government officials in China or elsewhere to illegally funnel contributions to the Democratic National Committee or the Clinton-Gore re-election campaign. …The committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, derided Mr. Burton and other Republicans for what he described as a "malicious and misleading hearing." He said Mr. Middleton was called as a witness by the GOP after he said he would refuse to cooperate only so that he could be "punished." …. Meanwhile, Attorney General Janet Reno yesterday denied that the Justice Department was stalling its campaign finance task force probe to block congressional Republicans from conducting their own inquiries. She said it was "certainly not true" that the department has marked some probes as "ongoing" to halt efforts by the GOP to investigate the accusations

Washington Times 8/23/99 Jerry Seper and Audrey Hudson "Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee used an unsigned affidavit to challenge the credibility of a witness who diverted cash from fund-raiser John Huang to the Democratic National Committee…. The unsigned affidavit -- which has since has been disavowed --came from the father of Los Angeles businessman David Wang, who testified under a grant of immunity that Huang reimbursed him $10,000 in contributions he was asked to make to the DNC. In the affidavit, Mr. Wang's father, James, disputed his son's sworn testimony of an August 1996 meeting with Huang in Los Angeles at which the illegal diversion of cash to the DNC was discussed. The affidavit said that contrary to his son's claims, James Wang did not attend the Aug. 16, 1996, meeting with Huang. Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, the committee's ranking Democrat, used the one-page statement during a rancorous October 1997 hearing to challenge the credibility of David Wang. "Two of my staff members have recently spoken to your father, and he has denied being at any such meeting with John Huang," Mr. Waxman said in introducing the affidavit. "I don't think you have been candid from day to day, from Day One maybe. Each time, we get a different version of what happened." The purported statement by James Wang, obtained without his attorneys present, was written by Democratic staff attorneys Kenneth Ballen and Christopher Lu, who submitted a separate affidavit to the committee recounting their conversation with James Wang. In that statement, dated Oct. 9, 1997, Mr. Ballen and Mr. Lu said James Wang was "neither present at any meeting nor aware of any conversations in which John Huang asked David Wang to make a campaign contribution." But James Wang did not sign the affidavit. Instead, he called his attorney, Michael A. Carvin, who obtained a separate, handwritten statement in which the elder Wang said he "was present at the meeting with my son and John Huang. . . . At that meeting, John Huang asked for a donation to the presidential campaign."…..The committee's Republican staff believes Democrats actively sought to delay, impede and obstruct the committee's campaign finance probe, and have suggested that hearings might be called to investigate the matter. They noted that an astounding 121 witnesses claimed their Fifth Amendment privilege to avoid testifying or fled the country. The sheer number of witnesses refusing to cooperate is "unprecedented" in comparison with other recent congressional investigations, said Dick Leon, deputy counsel for House Republicans during the 1987 Iran-Contra hearings, and a professor of congressional investigations at Georgetown University…..Mr. Waxman also has denied any impropriety, saying his staff made efforts with witnesses only to clarify the law and congressional procedures….. Mr. Waxman, however, has been viewed as a major obstructionist in the campaign finance probe. The Republicans' former chief counsel, Richard D. Bennett, a former U.S. attorney, once said during a hearing that while the investigation was moving "in the right direction . . . there has been more of an effort to fight [the investigation] than to get the facts." Mr. Bennett said he was forced to assign a lawyer whose daily task was to respond to Mr. Waxman's complaints…."


Etherzone Online 8/26/99 Bob Momenteller "…Congressman Henry Waxman represents the 29th district of California. This district contains the second highest concentration of Democratic voters in the country. From the wealth and power of Beverly Hills to the semen stained sidewalks of Hollywood, everything that is wrong with America can be found within its seedy borders. The people here have a disdain for traditional moral values and their desire for fashionable new moral standards--promiscuous sex and drug use are OK, but smoking cigarettes and failing to exercise are wrong. It takes a special person to represent this liberal cesspool of moral-less mass and the13th term Congressman fits the bill. His socialist and communist ideology is shamelessly flaunted wherever he casts his shadow. His Congressional District office is filled with drably dressed workers from his Chief of staff, right down to the secretaries who all make the same pay. Waxman, is one of a handful of Congressional members who has put his signature on the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America. This far out wacko group takes on a Marxist flair and believes in economic redistribution in order to achieve social and environmental justice. Waxman is convinced that the free enterprise system is the root of all evil and that the government can only salvage man from his own evil until utopia is reached. Such philosophical overtones to his oath of office are rather comical until you realize that they come from a ranking member of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee…..

Etherzone Online 8/26/99 Bob Momenteller "…While demonizing anyone who took campaign contributions from US cigarette manufacturers, Waxman was benefiting from a Chinese government-owned tobacco company. Ted Sioeng, a Chinese intelligence operative, has the exclusive distribution rights to Pagoda Red Mountain cigarettes in the US. This Chinese government-owned cigarette company, is one of the largest tobacco companies in the world. Sioeng, who gave over $400,000 to the DNC, is known be friends with Mochtar and James Riady. The Riadys who are also part of Beijing's intelligence network, own the Lippo Group. The communist Chinese used Sioeng's cigarette distributorship as a conduit to funnel money into the 1996 elections…. Sioeng is well known to Waxman and the surrounding southern California districts. Sioeng, went on to purchase a Chinese newspaper in Monterey Park that proliferates Beijing's propaganda and uses it as another intelligence gathering pipe line. In the1996 Buddhist temple affair with Al Gore, we see Ted Sioeng sitting beside his honor. Early on in the Chinagate investigation, Kent La, a close business associate of Sioeng, wanted tell all to the Burton committee. Waxman was the one who lead the way in successfully blocking any immunity agreement for this key witness thus keeping him from freely testifying. Why? …"

Etherzone Online 8/26/99 Bob Momenteller "…The above scenario is just one of a litany of obfuscations and stonewalling that Henry Waxman has created in order to block the Chinagate probe. Since 1997, he has been one of the main figures in intimidating witnesses who command little English from testifying. A Congressional probe into the matter is now being mobilized along with a complaint filed last week by Judicial Watch. Waxman ,along with his co-conspirators, is suspected of intimidating witnesses with a scheme to use the Internal Revenue Service to audit and harass those who speak out against the Democratic administration. Waxman is also suspected of being instrumental in the use of boogie-man tactics. Instructing aides to make uncomfortable suggestions to potential witnesses on Waxman's behalf to win their silence is also being probed…."

Washington Post 9/14/99 Lorraine Adams David Vise "…Meanwhile, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) accused Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) of acting irresponsibly by calling for Reno's resignation. Waxman said it was ludicrous for Burton to accuse Reno of being involved in a coverup because the House Government Reform Committee, which Burton chairs, has had Justice Department documents since 1995 showing that the FBI used devices that could cause a fire. "Before people make accusations about anybody, they ought to know what they have in their own files," Waxman said. Waxman, the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee, said the discovery of the documents undermines the "credibility" of Republican attacks on Reno. Waxman attached the documents to a letter he sent yesterday to former Missouri senator John C. Danforth, whom Reno appointed special counsel on Waco last week. Waxman speculated that the attorney general simply was unaware of all the documents that her giant department turned over to Congress. Reno, for her part, has been forced to retract statements she made to Congress claiming that no devices were used that could have started the fire. Mark Corallo, a committee spokesman, dismissed Waxman's remarks as a politically motivated attack on Republicans. He said Justice "dumped" more than 100,000 pages of documents on the committee on the eve of the Waco hearings, making it impossible to review all of them…."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 9/22/99 Sean Scully "....The 16 Puerto Rican terrorists offered clemency by President Clinton are not nonviolent criminals as portrayed by the administration but had a direct hand in actual or potential deaths and injuries, FBI counterterrorism official Neil J. Gallagher said yesterday. "I think these are criminals and terrorists and represent a threat to the United States," Mr. Gallagher, the bureau's assistant director for national security, told the House Government Reform Committee. "It's my concern that releasing these individuals will have both a psychological and operation impact on active terrorist organizations [that could] reinvigorate them," Mr. Gallagher told an earlier hearing before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds counterterrorism efforts...... Michael B. Cooksey of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons testified that one of the terrorist leaders offered clemency, Oscar Lopez, plotted a spectacular and violent escape by helicopter from the federal prison in Leavenworth, Kan., in 1984. After discovering that plot, Lopez was sentenced to an additional 15 years and was transferred to "supermax" prisons in Illinois and Colorado, which house the most dangerous federal prisoners. Mr. Clinton offered Lopez a reduced sentence but the convict refused to renounce violence and remains behind bars.....Even Democrats who normally support Mr. Clinton appeared troubled by the clemency. Rep. Henry A. Waxman, California Democrat, appeared shaken by the victim testimony and backed away from earlier support for the president. "I don't know how I would have come up with the decision he made," said Mr. Waxman, the ranking Democrat on Mr. Burton's committee. "I probably wouldn't have." ...."

AP Larry Neumeister 10/5/99 "...Federal prosecutors say $7 billion from Russia was illegally funneled through accounts at the Bank of New York in one of the largest money laundering cases in U.S. history, according to a criminal indictment unsealed Tuesday. Three individuals and three companies were charged with channelling the money - believed to have ties to the Russian mafia - in the first criminal charges to be brought in the case. The charges were contained in a three-count indictment filed under seal in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Sept. 16. Peter Berlin, 44, Lucy Edwards, 41, - a former vice president at the Bank of New York - and Aleksey Volkov, 34, as well as Benex International Co. Inc., Becs International L.L.C. and Torfinex Corp. were named as defendants. The Bank of New York, the nation's 15th-largest bank, was not named in the indictments...... Lewis Schiliro, an FBI assistant director in charge of the New York office, said the FBI is primarily focused on determining the origin of the funds and tracing the path of transactions through accounts at the Bank of New York. ...."

Freeper NDCorup adds 10/6/99 "....In the Lufthansa theft at JFK airport Lou Shiliro was in charge of the investigation. It is reported that Shiliro is now in charge of the N.Y. FBI thanks to Clinton. There were No arrests, No money recovered, and the witnesses are all dead. Sal Reale was in charge of Security at JFK airport and was Gotti's bagman at Mena. Phillip Shiliro, (Lou Shiliro's son) works for Waxman. It's noted that Lou Shiliro controls the Flt. 800 evidence......"

Judicial Watch 11/3/99 "….Yesterday, on Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes," Chairman Dan Burton of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee was confronted by Sean Hannity about the obstruction by Representative Henry Waxman, and his band of Democrats, in unsuccessfully trying to get Johnny Chung to invoke the Fifth Amendment and not offer testimony that would implicate the White House and Democrat Party in treasonous activities in Chinagate. Ironically, Waxman solicited Chung for money on August 26, 1996. The exchange on "Hannity & Colmes" with Mr. Burton went as follows: Hannity: Is that a crime? I mean obstructing an investigation of Congress? Burton: Well, I don't know if you'd call it obstructing if you're giving advice on how to take the Fifth, but I sure think it's unseemly and unethical for members of the minority -- or the majority -- to be telling somebody how to take the Fifth Amendment.

Judicial Watch 11/3/99 "….Many weeks ago, when Mr. Chung revealed the Democrat obstruction, Judicial Watch prepared and filed a complaint with the House Ethics Committee against Waxman and other participating Democrats on the Government Reform Committee. Under House Rules, the complaint, to go forward, must be certified by a Congressman. Accordingly, to test Chairman Burton's sincerity and hold him to his word, Judicial Watch sent the complaint to Burton and asked that he endorse it. Burton has complained over the last three years that the reason his Chinagate nvestigation has failed, is due to this Democrat obstruction. Despite many, many continual requests by Judicial Watch, Chairman Burton has failed to endorse Judicial Watch's House Ethics Complaint, or for that matter file one of his own….."

Associated Press 11/15/99 John Solomon Larry Margasak "…..Members of Congress and the White House have triggered audits of hundreds of tax-exempt groups this decade by lodging complaints with the Internal Revenue Service against their political foes. The referrals range from citizen letters and newspaper articles to personal demands for investigations, according to documents reviewed by The Associated Press. The White House once referred a constituent complaint about a group that had suggested presidential lawyer Vincent Foster had been murdered. Democratic lawmakers sought investigations of conservatives ranging from the Heritage Foundation to the Rev. Jerry Falwell. And the Republican chairman of the House committee that writes tax laws sought an audit of a Buddhist temple in California after it was host for a Democratic fund-raiser featuring Vice President Al Gore……. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., an ally of the president, referred Falwell, an outspoken critic of Clinton, for investigation based on a constituent complaint in May 1993 that ``religious broadcasters are using their tax-exempt status for political purposes.'' Waxman urged the agency to keep his constituent's ``concerns in mind.'' The congressman got a speedy reply, but the IRS didn't audit Falwell. Five of his organizations had just been audited two years earlier. IRS officials insist they don't buckle under pressure….."


REP. BURTON: …… Before I start the questioning, I'd like to ask or make -- you can go ahead and start the clock so this will be on my time -- I'd like to respond just briefly to Mr. Waxman's comments…… Regarding the bias that we have and the bias that our government has toward people on the Democrat side and people involved in this campaign finance scandal; Mr. Huang really was not fined any financial penalty whatsoever, although Mr. Huang and Mr. Trie were involved in over $2 million, we believe, in illegal conduit contributions that came from foreign sources. And much of this money, probably 90 percent of it, has been returned. So they were directly involved. And there is no question about it, or else the DNC would not have returned that; while at the same time the Dole for President Committee got $120,000, much less than the $2 million, from a man named Simon Fireman. He was fined $6 million. The Empire Sanitary Landfill -- they gave $129,000. They were fined 8 million. Another Republican, who was responsible for much fewer illegal conduit contributions than Mr. Huang, had a $5 million fine. And both of the Republicans got terms of detention.

Now none of that has happened to any of the Democrat conduit contributors, that we know of -- $5 million fine, $8 million fine, $6 million fine. And so as far as the equal application of justice, it doesn't appear to me that there has been an equal application of justice by this Justice Department. And I've talked about that a number of times. And I've said that I thought the attorney general was showing a bias, was blocking our investigations, wasn't cooperating with this committee. And I've said the same things of the White House.

Now I stand by what I've said in the past. I understand -- and much of what you said today, Mr. Waxman, you have said time and time again. You've tried to make a comedy out of our hearings. You've tried to denigrate our hearings. You've tried to say we've been on a witch hunt. You've tried to say all kinds of things. And you said it again today. And you have a right to say those things. But the fact of the matter is, we are determined, if it's at all possible, to get to the bottom of this campaign finance scandal, and we're going to be vigilant, and we're going to continue. And I fully expect, at future hearings, you will say the same things over and over again. You will attack me over and over again. But I want you to know, Mr. Waxman, I and this committee will not be deterred. And now the American people can watch gavel-to-gavel and judge for themselves, from the questions and answers of the witnesses, whether or not we're being fair. And I think that they're going to be pretty fair when they judge what we do….." 1/5/00 Jim McDermont, Member of Congress "….Dr. Morris Chapman Director, Executive Committee, Southern Baptist Convention …… We were disheartened to learn that the Southern Baptists had published a pamphlet recently regarding prayer for Hindus that uses overly aggressive and insensitive language. We are particularly alarmed at the level of insensitivity displayed towards members of one of the oldest religions in the world. We do not take issue with your right to pray for whom and whatever you choose. However, we believe that the manner in which you have chosen to do this, in regards to Hinduism, goes beyond the bounds of decorum, tact, respect and understanding. In your recent pamphlet, you say that "Mumbai is a city of spiritual darkness...(Hindus are) slaves bound by false gods." We cannot understand how men and women, raised and educated in the world's bastion of religious freedom and tolerance, can characterize another religion as spiritually dark and false….. Please understand that we do not oppose your organization's efforts to educate non-Baptists to your views, however, we would hope that in the future you adopt a more tolerant and enlightened method…..Sincerely,

Jim McDermott, Member of Congress
Gary Ackerman, Member of Congress
Frank Pallone Jr., Member of Congress
Henry Waxman, Member of Congress
Merrill Cook, Member of Congress
Alcee Hastings, Member of Congress
Tom Lantos, Member of Congress …."


Stephen Arche 1/25/2000 "….At a House Committee on Government Reform hearing here, the one-time colonel [Stanislav Lunev] in Soviet and then Russian Federation military intelligence, gave a chilling presentation of his country's Cold War plans to defeat the United States…… From behind a screen to shield him from the view of the audience, Lunev testified Soviet generals had designed a special plan for the future war against America and its allies in which special-operation forces commanders would come to the United States and other NATO countries a few days - maybe even a few hours - before actual war. Using weapons systems that had already been hidden at strategic points throughout the United States, he said, the Soviet generals would have demolished the country's political infrastructure by destroying strategic facilities and assassinating top military leaders such as the president and vice president just hours or minutes before a nuclear missile strike. Lunev said one of his espionage assignments had been to scout "drop sites" for weapons caches. He said he believes Russian military weapons are currently hidden in strategic points all across the United States and Europe for just such a purpose. Those hidden stockpiles of weapons would include portable nuclear devices, chemical and biological weapons, conventional weapons and incendiary devices, he said. Lunev told the panel the weapon caches could be used whenever the Russian commanders in charge are given the "go." …… "These military plans are still consistent with Russian generals, and these military plans in time of possible war would be fulfilled by special-operations forces commanders." ….. Burton said, "Some members of the media are indicating we might be trying to create paranoia and a new Cold War. That's untrue…… "Despite administration claims that our Russian policy is a success, many of us have watched and worried and warned for years that the Russian policy has careened toward failure," he [Pry, formerly CIA] said. "The administration's Russian policy has been more of a public-relations campaign to persuade the American people all is well rather than a hardheaded, bulleted program to really advance free enterprise and democracy in Russia and to protect U.S. vital national interests."…."

Stephen Arche 1/25/2000 "….Weldon said the Clinton administration has had a consistent pattern of not wanting anything to surface that might give the perception of a potential or real problem in the relationship between the United States and Russia, including the theft of International Monetary Fund dollars, abuse in insider trading in Russia and arms-control treaty violations. Although many questions regarding U.S. foreign policy with Russia are aimed at the Clinton administration, Weldon said, the hearing was not a "Republican witch-hunt." Burton observed that Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democratic member of the committee who represents a Los Angeles district and is a staunch defender of the Clinton administration, chose not come to the hearing. "I really regret the State Department isn't here today," Burton said. "They just jumped through hoops not to testify." ……. "


CBSNEWS.COM 3/26/00 "….."Nicotine is a drug. Cigarette smoking is addictive, I've said. So to me, we have a lot of common ground here," Steven Parrish, senior vice president for cigarette maker Philip Morris, told CBS News' Face The Nation on Sunday. That sounds a lot like one lawmaker who wants the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco. "It's in everyone's interest to have a regulatory scheme in place, so that the tobacco industry knows the rules and that we recognize that we've got to do something about a very real problem of children smoking," said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) on Face The Nation. ……"

CBSNEWS.COM 3/26/00 "….."Last week, the High Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that only Congress could authorize federal regulation of tobacco. Waxman regards that ruling as a green light to move forward....... Waxman added he hopes his legislation on FDA regulation will make it to the House floor, where he believes it would pass. "It's not my purpose to run them out of business," he said. "If at some point, people don't smoke and they go into another line of business, so be it but I don't think that's going to happen. My hope is that we can stop kids from smoking because most adults wouldn't take up this habit." ........ Parrish with Philip Morris replied, "If Congress decides that the Food and Drug Administration is the appropriate body to regulate us, I have no problem with that." But, he added, "it is a mistake for the FDA to regulate cigarettes as medical devices or pharmaceutical products, which was the proposal that the Supreme Court struck down" in its ruling. …."


Washington Weekly 10/2/00 Rep. Weldon, House of Representatives "………Mr. Speaker, I have had the pleasure of serving in this body for 14 years. And during the 14 years, one of the things that I have learned about our colleagues is that we all have a feeling of high regard for each other. If someone is going to say something about another Member, the protocol usually has been that the Member be told about it in advance. …….

This past Thursday that did not happen, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) got up after everyone left Washington, late Thursday, and did a special order for 1 hour; a tirade mentioning a number of Members of Congress. Now, I will not do to him what he did to our colleagues. He only mentioned me briefly, but I told the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) this morning that I would come here personally and respond to the things he said regarding me.

The gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) said that we were too harsh in criticizing the administration for the possibility of having the administration transfer technology to China in return for campaign dollars. He went on to make two specific charges: number one, that the Cox Committee, which I served on, in fact totally exonerated the administration on those allegations; and, number two, that the Justice Department said there was no reason to believe there was any need to further investigate the transfer of campaign dollars for technology to China.

Well, let us look at the facts, Mr. Speaker. The fact is that this gentleman, the largest single contributor in the history of American politics, Mr. Bernard Schwartz, from 1995 to 2000, contributed personally $2,255,000 to Democratic national candidates, DNC, the Democratic Senatorial Committee and the Democratic Congressional Committee.

The allegation was in 1998 when he contributed $655,000 to those candidates that there was a potential quid pro quo because Bernard Schwartz had been lobbying for a permit waiver to transfer satellite technology to China.

Now, the Justice Department has said on the record they opposed that the President intervene to a make a waiver decision, but the President went ahead on his own.

Now, in fact, our Cox committee did not even look at this issue. In fact, if the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) would have bothered to read the Cox committee report, in the appendix under the scope of the investigation it says, we did not even consider the political contribution aspect of this because other committees were looking at it and because we could not get people to testify because they pled the fifth amendment or they left the country.

But let us look at what the Justice Department said. Here is what the Justice Department said in the LaBella memo, which I would encourage our colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), and every citizen in America to request from their Member of Congress:

'It is not a leap to conclude that having been the beneficiary of Schwartz's generosity in connection with the media campaign, the administration would do anything to help Bernie Schwartz and Loral if the need arose.'

This was written not by a Republican. This was written by Charles LaBella, Justice Department special investigator to Louis Freeh, which went to Janet Reno.

They further said this, Mr. Speaker: 'As suggested throughout this memo, there are many as yet unanswered questions. However, the information suggests these questions are more than sufficient to commence a criminal investigation.'

Who would that criminal investigation have been against? It would have been against four people: Bill Clinton , Hillary Clinton , Al Gore, and Harold Ickes, who is Hillary's campaign manager in New York. It would have been against the Loral Corporation and Bernard Schwartz.

So here we have it, Mr. Speaker. The two allegations made by the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) are totally false. He owes an apology to the American people. Because, number one, the Cox Committee never looked at these facts. And he should know that unless he cannot read very well. It is right here in the text. Number two, he claims the Justice Department dismissed these allegations out of hand.

Well, I trust the American people. I would urge all of our colleagues to have this report available to every constituent across America, the LaBella memo. It is 94 pages. It is redacted, but they can read for themselves and they can see what this Justice Department, what FBI Director Louis Freeh, what handpicked Janet Reno Investigator Charles LaBella said about the need for a criminal investigation.

They name the four people in this document, and the four people are those four I mentioned along with Bernard Schwartz and the possibility of a quid pro quo for the $655,000 and all this money being transferred.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, when I get more time, I will go through the specific findings in the LaBella memo where they raised the issue of the request coming in to the President and specifically on February 18, 1998, the President signed the waiver after the Justice Department advised him not to sign it.

On January 21 of that same year, Schwartz donated $30,000 to the DNC. On March 2 he donated $25,000. All through that year, he donated $655,000 dollars. And that is why Louis Freeh and that is why Charles LaBella said there needs to be a further investigation for criminal activities involving the transfer of campaign dollars to the Democratic party, to the President and the Vice President and the First Lady and Harold Ickes based on the technology transfer to China, especially through the waiver that Bernie Schwartz got even though the Justice Department advised the President not to grant that waiver.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) owes this Congress an apology.