DOWNSIDE LEGACY AT TWO DEGREES OF PRESIDENT CLINTON
SECTION: THE STORY OF A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE
SUBSECTION: WHITEWATER
Revised 1/8/01

WHITEWATER

President's deposition concerning Arkansas McDougal related bank fraud was denial. Susan McDougal's refusal to answer question "Did the president testify truthfully?" resulted in jail time. Bank documents found in trunk of abandoned car.

NewsMax 3/3/99 Inside Cover "…D'Amato hit Starr hard when questioned about his own committee's attempts to learn if the late Vincent Foster had been tipped off about an impending FBI search of Judge David Hale's office just hours before Foster was found dead of a gunshot wound to the head…. D'Amato added, "There was an absolute total fear on the part of the Democrats that Judge Hale, if permitted to testify, would have rocked the country," saying that Starr's insistence on immunity for Hale only kept the truth from coming out. Just months after Foster's 1993 death, Hale fingered President Clinton in Whitewater wrongdoing. Foster, while Deputy White House Counsel, had doubled as the Clintons' Whitewater lawyer…"

Fox News 3/8/99 Freeper ohmlaw98 "…Have heard the report twice now, but did not see it posted here...Fox News is reporting that evidence implicating Bill and Hillary Clinton in Whitewater related crimes will be introduced by the prosecution in the Susan McDougal trial. The Fox News reporter did not address the nature of the evidence except that it implicates both Bill and Hillary and believes that it relates to obstruction issues surrounding the case....Prosecutors who brought the original charges against McDougal will take the stand for the prosecution....Hickman Ewing was interviewed by Fox on the Courthouse steps......"

Fox News 3/09/99 David Schuster Freeper truthkeeper "…In a live report, David Schuster said prosecutors will focus on the following in the newest McDougal trial: 1. The $5,000 check with the "Payoff Bill Clinton" memo 2. Testimony regarding fraudulent loans 3. Fact that all WW partners were aware that monies from the loan were used on ANOTHER fraudulent real estate deal as well…."

Associated Press 3/10/99 Peggy Harris "…Barrett told the jurors that Mrs. McDougal refused to testify about financial transactions that he charged undercut Clinton's sworn testimony at the 1996 trial of Mrs. McDougal, her former husband and then-Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker. "Bill Clinton said, `I never received a loan from''' the McDougals' failing savings and loan, Barrett told the jury. In fact, prosecutors now have a $27,600 cashier's check from the McDougals' S&L made payable to "William Jefferson Clinton,'' he charged. The prosecutor pointed to a $5,081 check bearing the words "payoff Clinton'' and said the money had been partial payment of the $27,600 check which was used to pay off a Whitewater debt. The $5,081 came from an account under Mrs. McDougal's control, Barrett said. Prosecutors plan to call as witnesses some of the grand jurors who wanted to question Mrs. McDougal as part of their investigation of the Clintons. Geragos called Barrett's theory "nonsense,'' and said Mrs. McDougal will describe the treatment she received from Starr's office… "

Associated Press 3/12/99 Pete Yost "… Starr's prosecutors brandished their prize exhibit in the case — a $27,600 check from James and Susan McDougal's savings and loan made payable to "Bill Clinton'' — and juxtaposed it with the president's testimony that he'd never taken out a loan from the S&L. The trial features James McDougal speaking from the grave. The medium is one of Starr's investigators, FBI agent and accountant Mike Patkus, who has spent five years investigating Clinton. Patkus testified that McDougal tipped him in 1996 that there had been a loan to Clinton, contrary to what the president had said under oath. Patkus spent many days rummaging through the failed financial institution's records before he found the 1982 check to Clinton on microfilm. A garage mechanic later pulled the original from the trunk of a tornado-damaged car abandoned 10 years ago by a McDougal S&L employee who had brought the vehicle in for transmission repairs. In what could be his last effort against the president, Starr is putting Mrs. McDougal on trial for criminal contempt and obstruction because she won't say what she knows about the Clinton loan. She endorsed a separate check that helped pay it off…. James McDougal told Starr's office that he had gotten Clinton to sign papers for the loan but McDougal destroyed the records after the loan was paid off…."

AP 3/16/98 Peggy Harris "…``I never spent any significant time at all looking at the books and records of Whitewater,'' Mrs. Clinton said in videotaped testimony for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr. Forty minutes of the videotape was shown in court today during the contempt trial of Susan McDougal, who has refused to testify about her Whitewater dealings with the Clintons…."

Associated Press 3/16/99 Pete Yost Freeper jimbo123 "…Later Tuesday, a former employee of the McDougals' savings and loan explained why he abandoned the car with the cashier's check and other documents inside. Henry Floyd testified that he was supposed to be carry Madison Guaranty documents to a warehouse in 1988 but dropped off his car at a garage for repair. When a dispute arose over the bill, he left the car there, forgetting the documents, Floyd said. The garage owner opened the car's trunk 10 years later, after a tornado, and discovered thousands of S&L documents. When Floyd was asked why he sought a limited grant of immunity from Starr's office before testifying, Mrs. McDougal remarked from the defense table: "Scared.'' That led to a complaint from prosecutors and admonishment from the judge…."

New York Post http://www.nypost.com/ 3/17/99 Brian Blomquist Freeper A Whitewater Researcher "…Hillary Clinton was called as a video witness in Susan McDougal's Whitewater trial yesterday as the past came back to haunt the First Lady...."I never spent any significant time at all looking at the books and records of Whitewater," Mrs. Clinton insisted on the video, shown publicly for the first time in Little Rock....The video was made for the Whitewater grand jury last April....McDougal is on trial for refusing to answer Starr's questions. Her lawyer claimed Starr's team never bothered to ask the First Lady those same questions - but the video shows they did....The First Lady is seen wearing a yellow suit. She looked serious and nodded as she was handed the $27,600 check in her husband's name and claimed she'd never seen it....The $27,600 check was issued in Bill Clinton's name by the bank owned by Susan McDougal and her late husband Jim - and partly repaid by an illegal $300,000 taxpayer-funded loan to Susan McDougal....The president has sworn under oath that he never got any loans from the McDougals' bank…"

Reuters 3/17/99 "…The Whitewater grand jury headed by independent prosecutor Kenneth Starr was not out to ''get'' President Clinton, a member of the panel testified in a related trial Wednesday. The grand juror testified in the case that Starr's prosecutors have brought against former Clinton business partner Susan McDougal, who was convicted of fraud in 1996 in connection with the Whitewater investigation…. The prosecution's strategy has been to show that Susan McDougal's testimony is crucial to the Whitewater investigation as the only surviving Clinton partner after the death of her ex-husband in jail last year.

It has also tried to undermine McDougal's claims that Starr would twist her words to hurt Clinton, which has been her defense for remaining silent. ``We wanted to hear what she (McDougal) had to say,'' said grand juror Jennifer Castleberry of Mayflower, Arkansas. ``Do you believe the grand jury was out to get Bill Clinton?'' asked Starr deputy prosecutor Julie Myers. ``No,'' Castleberry answered. ``Do you believe the grand jury was out to get anyone?'' Myers continued. ``No,'' Castleberry said…."

AP 3/17/99 Peggy Harris "…The witness, Jennifer Castleberry of Mayflower, a small town 20 miles north of Little Rock, served on the grand jury investigating the Clintons' Whitewater business dealings from May 1996 to September 1997. She was present on one of the occasions when Mrs. McDougal refused to testify.

"She wouldn't talk,'' Mrs. Castleberry testified. "She wanted to give a statement. She would not allow us to read the statement. She refused to answer the questions.'' Mrs. Castleberry said the grand jurors met for about 15 or 20 minutes, out of the presence of Mrs. McDougal or the prosecutors, to consider whether to let her read the statement. They decided to deny the request. …"

AP 3/16/99 Pete Yost "…In a flurry at the end of a day in which three former grand jurors testified for the prosecution, attorney Mark Geragos issued a subpoena to Deputy Independent Counsel W. Hickman Ewing Jr. to testify when Mrs. McDougal's defense begins its case Thursday. Geragos said that Ewing, who oversees Starr's Arkansas office but is not part of the current trial team, would be the first defense witness, and he would not rule out summoning Starr as well. ``First let me deal with Hick Ewing,'' he said. The defense team is eager to change the issue at the trial from Mrs. McDougal's defiance of a federal judge's order to testify before the Whitewater grand jury to the tactics of Starr's office…."

AP 3/18/99 "…Kenneth Starr's top deputy testified today that at one point in the Whitewater investigation he drafted a proposed indictment of Hillary Rodham Clinton and showed it to others in the independent counsel's office. Called as the lead-off defense witness in Susan McDougal's trial, W. Hickman Ewing Jr. also testified that he ``had problems'' with some of President Clinton and Mrs. Clinton's statements to investigators in April 1995. Ewing said he drafted the indictment against the first lady sometime after September 1996 and was not more specific. Ewing said it was not unusual for a federal prosecutor to draft an indictment whether or not charge is ever brought…."

Reuters 3/23/99 Freeper Brian Mosely "…Whitewater figure Susan McDougal said Tuesday President Clinton told the truth when he testified in her 1996 trial that he knew nothing about a $300,000 loan at the heart of the Whitewater scandal. …"

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 3/23/99 Erica Werner Freeper HAL9000 "…She [Susan McDougal] said the initial news report during the 1992 presidential campaign about the Whitewater land deal came about because James McDougal was offered a financial incentive by Little Rock lawyer and two-time unsuccessful Republican gubernatorial candidate Sheffield Nelson to talk to The New York Times reporter Jeff Gerth…."

LA Times 3/25/99 Eric Lichtblau "...Flashing streaks of her famed defiance, Whitewater defendant Susan McDougal sparred with one of independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr's deputies from the witness stand Wednesday and drew repeated rebukes from the judge for her reluctance to answer the prosecutor's questions directly. "I want you to understand you are expected to respond to these questions," an increasingly frustrated U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. told McDougal as her cross-examination began at her trial. "I'm not about to let anybody manipulate this system." The series of testy exchanges marked an ironic deja vu in the case, because it was McDougal's refusal to answer questions before a Whitewater grand jury that led to her trial here on contempt and obstruction charges....."

New York Times Neil Lewis 3/25/99 "…A prosecutor for Kenneth W. Starr sought Wednesday to undermine Susan H. McDougal's testimony about President Clinton's knowledge of decades-old financial dealings in Arkansas, portraying her as someone who has never accepted the reality of her own criminal conviction and who tailors her accounts to fit the drama of the moment…."


AP 3/31/99 Peggy Harris "…The judge in the Susan McDougal case stunned prosecutors by allowing testimony from a Virginia woman who says, as Mrs. McDougal does, that she was mistreated by Kenneth Starr. Now in its fourth week, the trial took a dramatic turn Tuesday when U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. heard testimony from Julie Hiatt Steele of Richmond, Va. He granted a defense request that Ms. Steele be allowed to testify Friday to the jury that will decide Mrs. McDougal's guilt or innocence on criminal contempt and obstruction of justice charges. "This is mammoth,'' said Associate Independent Counsel Mark Barrett after rising from his chair to address the judge about the ruling. Outside the courthouse, Barrett said, "I think we've been on the defense since the defense case began, but this is a different level.''…"

AP 3/31/99 Peggy Harris "… A witness Wednesday corroborated Susan McDougal's story that she was pressured to cooperate in Kenneth Starr's investigation of President Clinton and his wife. … Mrs. Riley said that on another occasion she overheard a prosecutor telling Mrs. McDougal that Starr's office could "get you out of'' a California embezzlement case and a federal income tax investigation. The prosecutor said in a conference phone call that he would recommend that Mrs. McDougal be placed on probation for her Whitewater convictions, said Mrs. Riley, a longtime friend of the McDougals. "I remember the words, 'We could get you out of California and get you out of the income tax''' problem, Mrs. Riley testified…."

Peggy Harris 4.5.99 AP "... Defending the work of Kenneth Starr's office, a former Whitewater prosecutor testified today at Susan McDougal's trial that he had hoped to exonerate President Clinton for the good of the country. Recounting a 1995 conversation, prosecutor Ray Jahn said he told Starr on going to work for the independent counsel "that it was my hope that we would be able to clear the president.'' ..."

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 4/3/99 Erica Werner "...Susan McDougal's lawyers rested their case Friday morning with testimony from a woman who barely knows McDougal but tells a similar tale of unending persecution by independent counsel Kenneth Starr. Julie Hiatt Steele told jurors in Little Rock federal court that she is in massive debt, faces losing her home and has seen friends and relatives harassed because she wouldn't lie to please Starr.... Steele is scheduled for trial in Virginia on May 3, so her decision to testify in another case was considered highly unusual. Steele's lawyer, Nancy Luque, said Friday that she warned her client about it. But Steele insisted that she testify, Luque said.....During cross-examination, Myers attacked Steele's version of events as "story number two, the flip-flop story," and attempted to portray her as a woman driven by greed. Myers focused on an all-expenses-paid trip Steele took to Florida to sell a photo of Willey and Clinton to the National Enquirer, and accused Steele of being disgruntled about her Florida lodgings and trying to move to a ritzier hotel -- which Steele denied. Myers mentioned financial gains totaling $14,000 that Steele realized from the photo and from her discussions with reporters..... Myers also said that three of Steele's acquaintances contradicted Steele's story under oath. And she asked Steele about statements she had reportedly made indicating she was afraid of people in the White House and feared they would dispatch a hit man after her, a suggestion Steele scoffed at....."

AP 4/6/99 Peggy Harris "…U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. stated in jury instructions. "You have heard evidence that the defendant believed that certain prosecutors wanted something other than her truthful testimony," Howard wrote in the instructions which will be delivered following closing arguments Wednesday. "This evidence should be considered by you only when considering ... the obstruction of justice charge," the judge wrote. "You are not to consider this evidence when considering" the contempt charges. Another instruction says "the law does not recognize as a defense to these charges that the defendant was motivated to commit her acts by sincere moral, political or religious convictions." …"

AP 4/7/99 PEGGY HARRIS Freeper Steven W "…The federal judge presiding over the trial of Whitewater figure Susan McDougal is poised to instruct the jury that she, not special prosecutor Kenneth Starr, is the only one on trial. That reminder, drafted on Tuesday, may come as a surprise to jurors who have listened to a full month of attacks on Starr by Mrs. McDougal and her lawyer…."

AP 4/12/99 "...Susan McDougal was found innocent of obstructing Kenneth Starr's Whitewater investigation and the judge declared a mistrial today on the other two charges against her. U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on two criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent verdict in the courtroom...."

WSJ 4/13/99 Micah Morrison Freeper the Raven "...-Presented with a check she signed in 1983 with the notation "Payoff Clinton" in her handwriting, Susan McDougal told her latest jury here that the money was for a land purchase in the hamlet of Clinton, Ark. Never mind that among the documents prosecutors introduced were a list of loans noting one "B Clin ton" and a sheet of interest calculations ending with the figure "$5081.82"--the exact amount of the putative Clinton, Ark., check..."

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 4/13/99 Christ Osher Freeper L.N. Smithee "...He told reporters Monday, he resorted to bringing a law book to the deliberations on Friday in a last-ditch attempt to get five fellow jurors to see it the same way. "I was trying to bring up what was her state of mind,'' Nance said. "She honestly believed that even though she was given immunity, she could be held for false statements,'' Nance said. He said he thought the law book would shed further light on the legal definitions of state of mind and innocent reason -- legal terms that had been written into the jury instructions defining criminal contempt of court and obstruction of justice in the McDougal case...."

AP 4/13/99 "...A federal judge today dismissed a key defense challenge to the indictment of former Justice Department official Webster Hubbell, but said it's likely the scheduled June fraud trial will be delayed. U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the indictment, based on an Arkansas land deal, did not result from documents produced by Hubbell under an immunity agreement with Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr. "I'm satisfied the grand jury that indicted Mr. Hubbell was not exposed to any'' of the material produced under the immunity grant, the judge said in an oral ruling during a pretrial hearing. "It's also clear the investigation leading to the indictment ... was active and was ongoing'' before Hubbell produced the documents. Starr's office also sought - and won - a halt to much of the pretrial work while the prosecutors pursue an appeal to the judge's dismissal of a major count against Hubbell in March...."

 

CNN 4/8/99 Freeper L.N. Smithee "...BITTMAN: What they say is that -- what the independent counsel office said, I believe, is that despite whatever her good faith intentions were, she still has to follow the law. And that's been the law of this case since the very beginning. That is, remember, she raised these legal arguments, these technical arguments first when she refused to appear before the grand jury. Federal judge heard her out. Federal judge said, "no." Then Ms. McDougal appealed to the 8th circuit court of appeals. Three judges unanimously said "no." She has an absolute duty to testify, and that's what is at issue here. Did she knowingly and willfully -- that is, this was not a mistake -- did she knowingly and willfully fail to abide by the judge's order ..."

Peggy Harris, Associated Press 4/9/99 "...The judge in Susan McDougal's trial froze jury deliberations today and ordered an FBI investigation of possible attempts to influence the jurors. The chain of events began after it was discovered a juror had brought a state law book into the jury room. As he ordered the FBI inquiry, U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. also issued a subpoena to bring in for questioning a former Arkansas Supreme Court justice whose business card was found in the book...... He ordered the FBI inquiry after a discussion of whether the former justice, John I. Purtle, had any connection to Mrs. McDougal; whether Nance had been influenced by a factor outside the trial and whether the other jurors had been tainted.... In an interview, Purtle said he sold his house to Nance in 1997 and that he probably left the law book behind. Purtle said he knows Mrs. McDougal and Clinton, and he worked with Mrs. Clinton on a legal case before she became first lady. But Nance said he has no connection to Nance now and no connection to the McDougal trial - although he feels strongly that Mrs. McDougal shouldn't have been prosecuted for criminal contempt...."

Fox Newswire/AP "...Former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, whose shady financial deals got caught up in the Whitewater investigation, was ordered Monday to pay $1 million for setting up a sham bankruptcy to avoid taxes. Tucker was also ordered placed on four years' probation for hiding the value of a cable TV business he sold in 1988. Prosecutors said that if the company's real value was known, Tucker and business partner William Marks would have been liable for an additional $2.9 million in taxes....."

Fox Newswire/AP 5/21/99 Pete Yost "...Urging reinstatement of a criminal charge against Webster Hubbell, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's office argued in federal appeals court Friday that the indictment details dozens of alleged lies by the presidential friend. In throwing out one of 15 charges against Hubbell, a judge had declared that some language in the indictment was too vague....Defense lawyer Peter Romatowski said the language in the dismissed charge is so broadly worded that Hubbell doesn't know what the specific allegations are. "How is a jury to be instructed? ... Are they to be turned loose on 85 paragraphs?'' asked Romatowski. Appeals judge Stephen Williams, a Republican appointee to the court, suggested the dropped count may be so lengthy because of extensive evidence of wrongdoing by Hubbell. "Why is it the government's fault if evidence suggests 1,000'' acts "by which the scheme has been carried out?'' asked Williams...."

6/1/99 OIC Starr Freeper Thanatos "...Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr issued the following statement today: We are gratified by both the substance and the promptness of today's decision by the United States Court of Appeals. The D.C. Circuit unanimously reversed the District Court's judgment, which erroneously dismissed one of the 15 counts in the grand jury's indictment of Mr. Hubbell. In so ruling, the Court of Appeals acted in a very expeditious manner. We are grateful that the Court acted so promptly in considering and resolving the government's appeal...."

Washington Times 6/7/99 Jerry Seper "...Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr may have a surprise in store for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she ponders whether to run for a U.S. Senate seat in New York. His final report on two pending criminal investigations may tie the first lady to the Whitewater and "Travelgate" scandals. Although Mr. Starr has exonerated President Clinton of criminal acts in Whitewater, Travelgate and "Filegate," he has not done so for the first lady. Investigations are continuing into Whitewater and Travelgate and that prosecutorial decisions are "due soon." Mr. Starr's office has written at least one draft indictment, accusing the first lady of lying to federal investigators about her role in the Whitewater affair..."

New York Times 6/12/99 Neil Lewis "...Kenneth W. Starr, the Whitewater prosecutor, will not seek indictments of President Clinton or Hillary Rodham Clinton but has tentatively decided to issue a final report about their behavior, several associates of Mr. Starr said this week. The report, which could land in the middle of Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign, might be "blistering" in its descriptions of her actions, one Starr associate said. Mr. Starr, the associates said, decided that he would not seek criminal indictments after discussions in his office about that possibility. But as Mr. Starr winds down his operation, those associates said, he was leaning toward issuing a report that would discuss the Clintons' behavior in some detail.... In addition to issuing any report, Mr. Starr's office still has two trials to prosecute, both involving Webster L. Hubbell, the former Associate Attorney General and longtime friend of the Clintons. It would be difficult to turn over the Hubbell trials to the Justice Department for several reasons, said associates of Mr. Starr as well as department officials. The principal problem is that it would present too great a conflict of interest for the department to prosecute its former third-ranking official. Eric H. Holder Jr., the Deputy Attorney General, in an April letter to Representative George W. Gekas, Republican of Pennsylvania, suggested that the department could appoint a special counsel to handle cases like that of Mr. Hubbell. But another impediment to such a transfer is that Mr. Starr is said to believe that the department has little appetite for the prosecutions. In one case, in which Mr. Hubbell is charged with tax evasion, department officials had argued that the case should not have been brought. The second trial itself could prove a problem for Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Hubbell is charged with concealing information from the Federal authorities about the role he and Mrs. Clinton played as lawyers in a complicated Arkansas land transaction that helped lead to the collapse of a savings and loan institution....."

Fox News Wire AP Pete Yost "...Prosecutor Kenneth Starr said Sunday he has no choice but to keep investigating the Clintons, a course that could collide with the 2000 presidential election campaign and a possible Senate run by the first lady. Starr said he regards the coming criminal trial of Clinton friend Webster Hubbell - based on an indictment that refers 36 times to Hillary Rodham Clinton - as an important step in the investigation. "We're looking forward to a trial this summer, that's what we're preparing for right now,'' Starr said on "Fox News Sunday.''.... Starr said his investigation unavoidably has been prolonged because he has run into incomplete cooperation in many instances. "For my part, I just wish we had had full cooperation from the outset,'' Starr said..... Starr said he ultimately will file a final report on his investigation, as mandated by the independent counsel statute expiring this month. "We have made no decisions with respect to the specific contents of the report,'' he said..... "

CNN 6/13/99 "...Associates of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr said Sunday that no decision has been made on whether to indict President Bill Clinton or First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, despite a New York Times report saying the Whitewater prosecutor would not seek indictment. The New York Times, citing Starr's associates, reported that Starr had ruled out prosecuting the Clintons but had tentatively decided to issue a "blistering" report about their behavior. However, CNN's Bob Franken said Starr associates told him that, contrary to the Times report, the independent prosecutor has not made any decision on pressing for indictment. Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Starr said he also had not decided on the contents of his final report. That report would be a recitation of events and unresolved issues without any explicitly stated judgments, Starr associates told the Times, but the document could be highly critical of the first lady and its release would coincide with her expected campaign for U.S. Senate in New York....."

Drudge Report 6/16/99 "…The Office of the Independent Counsel has subpoened three local Nashville businessman who played a round of golf a few summers ago with former Clinton Aide David Watkins. During the game, Watkins reportedly told them that Hilary directly ordered the White House Travel Office firings.... MORE... "

Nashville Scene Willy Stern Matt Pulle 6/17/99 "…It started innocently enough--a round of golf one summer day at Hillwood Country Club in West Nashville. But the casual conversations on the lush fairways among the four duffers--three of them Nashville businessmen--have now become a major focus of interest to criminal investigators working for independent counsel Kenneth Starr. The Nashville Scene has learned that as Starr expands his probe into the so-called "Travelgate Affair," his investigation has led to conversations that took place both during and after the Hillwood outing. Importantly, one of the duffers that day was former White House administration director David Watkins, who oversaw the White House travel office. The other three players were Charlie Cloud, a relative newcomer to Nashville with ties to Arkansas; Mike Patton, a Nashville real estate executive; and John Haley, who is chairman of Nashville-based Southeastern Telecom. Investigations are focusing on whether Watkins related during the game to his fellow duffers that he had been ordered to fire the staffers in the travel office in May 1993. Hillary Clinton has denied in sworn statements making such an order; Watkins himself testified under oath before Congress that the decision to fire the travel office staffers was his, and his alone. If investigators are able to prove that Watkins lied to Congress, he could be subject to criminal charges of perjury…..But his wife, Terri Patton, told the Scene she clearly remembers when, while sipping cocktails by the pool at the Patton's Hillwood home after the game, Watkins said Hillary had called him about the travel office staffers and said, "fire their asses." Terri Patton says she related these comments to the two investigators working for Starr who recently visited her and her husband at their Nashville home. Investigators interviewed the Pattons separately, Terri said, so they couldn't hear what the other was saying. Terri Patton said she and her husband expect to testify about what Watkins allegedly said during that fateful round of golf and in the later chitchat at the Pattons' home. The Pattons, who own and manage several real estate ventures, say they are cooperating fully with Starr's office…"

Washington Post William Nicoson 6/18/99 "…On the day The Post reported that independent counsel Kenneth Starr had won a victory in the court of appeals sustaining the fraud indictment of Webster Hubbell, an editorial called for Mr. Starr to step aside, shifting the two Hubbell prosecutions to the Justice Department [June 2]….Much more is at stake than Mr. Hubbell's fate. The indictment count reinstated by the court of appeals charged that he made false statements to investigators concerning the alleged Castle Grande fraud. Mr. Hubbell's law partner at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton, at first denied to investigators from the Federal Deposit Insurance Co. and the Resolution Trust Corp. that she worked on Castle Grande matters. Then her billing records, under subpoena for two years, proved otherwise when they were discovered on a table in the reading room adjacent to her office in the White House family quarters…."

6/23/99 Judicial Watch "...Jane Sherburne, the past White House lawyer who was in charge of scandal damage control, and who still keeps in close contact with Hillary Clinton, was recently deposed in Judicial Watch's $90 million class action Filegate lawsuit. Ms. Sherburne's "insights" into the Clinton White House -- which Judicial Watch views with skepticism -- are featured prominently in Bob Woodward's new book, Shadow..... During the deposition ... Ms. Sherburne was forced to admit that she never asked Hillary Clinton substantive questions about her role in Filegate, and basically accepted her denials on face value. Judicial Watch, on the other hand, has uncovered much evidence linking Hillary Clinton to the scandal, which emanated from the firing of the Travel Office employees, which Ms. Clinton ordered. During the deposition, Ms. Sherburne also confirmed a truth which Judicial Watch already knew; that Ken Starr had little interest in investigating the Filegate scandal. In this regard, Ms. Sherburne could not remember a single witness who was called by Starr before the grand jury on Filegate. "Ms. Sherburne is a key witness in the Filegate case, and had numerous meetings on the scandal with George Stephanopoulos and Harold Ickes. However, when Stephanopoulos and Ickes testified, they characteristically claimed to remember little to nothing about them. Ickes and Stephanopoulos will now have to account for their 'bad memories,'" stated Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman...."

Drudge Report 6/23/99 "...FOX NEWS on Wednesday confirmed a DRUDGE REPORT [MARCH 18, 1999] that prosecutors working for Kenneth Starr are preparing to order Hillary Clinton to testify in the upcoming trial of her former law partner Webster Hubbell. The independent counsel's office and defense attorneys have both submitted witness lists to the court. And Mrs. Clinton is listed as a "prosecution witness," according to FOX NEWS' David Shuster...."

Associated Press 6/23/99 John Solomon "...Starr submitted Mrs. Clinton's name as one of 63 possible witnesses for Hubbell's trial, now scheduled for August. Mrs. Clinton is currently considering a race for the Senate from New York..... While Mrs. Clinton has never been charged with wrongdoing, she was referred to about three dozen times in Hubbell's indictment, making it clear that she would figure in the trial...."

New York Times 6/29/99 Neil Lewis "... In reaching the agreement, it appears Starr has finally relented in his efforts to press Hubbell, once the No. 3 official in the Clinton Justice Department, to produce information damaging to the Clintons. One associate of Starr, not in the prosecutor's office, said he believed that the decision to dispose of the Hubbell cases reflected Starr's eagerness to be done with the long and difficult investigation of the Clintons and to move swiftly to close down the independent counsel's office. Although his office is still investigating a few matters involving the Clintons, the major task remaining is for Starr to issue a report about his activities...."

AP 6/28/99 Pete Yost "...Webster Hubbell plans to plead guilty Wednesday to a felony charge that he attempted to cover up his and Hillary Rodham Clinton's role in a fraudulent Arkansas land deal, legal sources said today. Hubbell, the first lady's former law partner, also will plead guilty to a misdemeanor tax charge as part of the agreement, sources said. Hubbell had been scheduled to go on trial Aug. 9, and prosecutors had listed Mrs. Clinton as a potential witness. Under the agreement, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr will recommend that Hubbell receive no jail time. Starr also will seek dismissal of a tax case against Hubbell's wife, his accountant and his tax lawyer, the sources said. Starr's spokeswoman, Elizabeth Ray, declined comment..... Hubbell's legal team ``has allowed Starr's office to interview Hubbell'' in connection with the indictment on the land deal, which refers to Mrs. Clinton some three dozen times, one source said. The course of Starr's investigation will depend on the information that Hubbell and possibly other witnesses provide to the prosecutors, said the sources. ``The investigations are still open and still ongoing,'' one source said. Starr's office ``is not packing up.''...."

Judicial Watch 6/28/99 "...Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman and President Tom Fitton issued the following statement about the just announced Webster Hubbell plea agreement, which apparently contains no offer of cooperation. "With the recent offer of Janet Reno to drop all ethics probes of Starr's office if he and his prosecutors would end their investigations, as published a few weeks ago by Roberto Suro in The Washington Post, ("Justice Department Puts Starr Investigation on Hold Sources Say," June 6, 1999), it is clear that the independent counsel is 'bailing out.' It is sad that Starr's latest retreat coincides with the death of the independent counsel law this Wednesday, June 30, 1999."...."

Freeper Clarity 6/28/99 "...Evan aptly points out that Hubbell has pled to covering up his and Hillary's work on Castle Grande. That's how the indictment reads. So now he will privately explain to Starr, under oath, why it needed to be covered up and who else knew that it needed to be covered up. This leads to Hillary, who of course has already denied in her own grand jury testimony that she had ever worked on Castle Grande. But then two years after her testimony, the billing records proving her 60 hours of billed time on Castle Grande mysteriously showed up in the White House living quarters. It sure sounds like she, just like Hubbell, knew the work needed to be covered up. And so it was. But now Web is blabbing, and the FBI has lifted Hillary's prints off the records, according to Starr's office. It's not over. And don't even get me started on the Talking Points memo, which will also resurface in due course......"

Freeper Clarity 6/28/99 "... I didn't really want to go off topic, but yes, I am referring to the Tripp/Lewinsky Talking Points Memo. The treatment of this hot topic in Starr's report was tantalizing for its brevity and its plain avoidance of certain conclusions. He stated merely that "Lewinsky testified she wrote the talking points." He pointedly did not add that OIC accepted that testimony as true. Nor did he describe in any way any efforts that were surely undertaken by OIC to corroborate her claim to authorship, such as tracing the hard copy backwards in time, or examining her computer's hard drive or her e-mail program. Nor did Starr add the otherwise-to-be-expected denial of authorship by other possible parties such as Lindsey and Jordan. If they were asked about it at their grand jury appearances, surely they denied any role and thus we might have expected Starr to buttress Lewinsky's claim by noting that others had denied authorship. If Lindsey and Jordan and the others weren't asked about it during their grand jury appearances, then that suggests a calculated stratagem of some kind by Starr....."

Freeper Clarity 6/28/99 "...And note also that in other parts of the report Starr goes to great length to point out the extensive efforts OIC made to verify Lewinsky's testimony, such as with respect to the issue of the timing and number of her various White House visits, which testimony OIC tested by comparison to subpoenaed White House logs. Again, there is absolutely nothing in the report that gives any editorial endorsement to Lewinsky claim and there an odd lack of discussion of any forensics that were surely applied by OIC to verify or refute her claim. The foregoing suggests to me that Starr has undisclosed thoughts about the talking points and that he has possibly set a perjury trap for someone. There is just no way Lewinsky alone conceived the talking points. For example, one of the points states: "At around the time of [Willey's] husband's death (the President has claimed it was after her husband died. Do you really want to contradict him?), she came to you ...." I cannot accept that Monica Lewinsky was sufficiently versed in the Willey facts or the legal issues raised by them to offer such nuanced advice to Linda Tripp, and I can't believe Starr does either...."

Freeper Clarity 6/28/99 "...The indictment charges that Hubbell intentionally concealed ("covered up") the work he and Hillary performed on Castle Grande. There's a reason why the concealment was made. Hillary knows why. OIC knows why. And now Hubbell has provided more details...."

FoxNews Reuters 6/29/99 "...With the independent counsel law about to expire and his last pending cases about to be resolved, the end may finally be near for Kenneth Starr's lengthy investigation. Starr associates said Tuesday he may be close to wrapping up his investigation that started with Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton's investment in the failed Whitewater land deal in Arkansas and expanded to various White House scandals, including Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky. All that appears to be left for Starr would be to write a final report on his five-year, $40 million investigation, and he may be out of office before the end of the year, his associates said..... The plea deal spared Mrs. Clinton, who is considering running for the U.S. Senate from New York, the political embarrassment of having to go to court to testify as a prosecution witness at Hubbell's trial. The associates said they did not expect Starr to bring any other cases, assuming no new evidence emerged. "They don't have anything on Hillary,'' one source said...... Conservatives have started criticizing Starr. The conservative legal group Judicial Watch accused Starr of "bailing out'' and said it was "sad'' that his latest ''retreat'' with the Hubbell plea deal "coincides with the death of the independent counsel law.'' Starr privately told associates he was eager to finish his work and return to his private law firm...."

Worldtribune 6/29/99 Jerry Seper "...Convicted felon Webster L. Hubbell has signed a deal with independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr to avoid prison in exchange for admitting he lied about legal work he did for an Arkansas real estate project on which he worked with Hillary Rodham Clinton. The agreement, struck this week, raises the possibility that Mr. Hubbell's cooperation could result in charges against the first lady..... Mr. Starr has said questions remain over Mrs. Clinton's role with Castle Grande, and "a thorough investigation" found "no explanation" how the billing records got to the White House residence. He also has said Mr. Hubbell "may have additional information pertaining to Castle Grande . . . that we have been unable to obtain." Mr. Hubbell took the Rose firm records on Madison during the 1992 presidential election. A week before the billing records were found, the RTC said in a December 1995 report it had little information on Mrs. Clinton's ties to Madison or Castle Grande. After the records were discovered, it concluded that Mrs. Clinton had done more work for Madison and Castle Grande than investigators had thought..... In September 1996, the FDIC said Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Hubbell drafted legal papers Madison used to deceive bank examiners and divert the $300,000 to Mr. Ward. It said the papers "facilitated the payment of substantial commissions to Mr. Ward, who acted as a straw buyer." A straw buyer is one who owns property in name only, having never put up any money or assumed any risk. The FDIC said the Ward payments violated federal rules but did not accuse Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Hubbell of criminal wrongdoing. But the agency raised serious questions about their involvement in a project that ultimately cost taxpayers $3.8 million when it failed....."

The Associated Press 6/29/99 Pete Yost "...A no-jail-time request to U.S. District Judge James Robertson could mean Starr regards Hubbell as having little of value. It also could mean prosecutors regard the evidence he holds as significant after what the legal sources describe as meetings Hubbell has had with Starr's office. Hubbell's legal team has let Starr's office interview Hubbell in connection with the Castle Grande indictment, which refers to Mrs. Clinton about three dozen times, one source said. At the same time, Hubbell's plea would erase a headache that a public trial could have caused for Mrs. Clinton as she considers a run for a U.S. Senate seat from New York. Starr's prosecutors had listed Mrs. Clinton as a potential witness...."

Capitol Hill Blue 7/1/99 "...But Starr is apparently not ready to ride off into the sunset. Legal sources said his office was dealing with: --The 1993 purge of the White House travel office and whether Mrs. Clinton directed the firings. She says she did not. Other White House sources say she did. --Nathan Landow, a Maryland developer and Democratic Party contributor. A recently released FBI polygraph report says Kathleen Willey, who has accused Clinton of groping her at the White House, was telling the truth when she said Landow suggested possible testimony she could give in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. Landow denies any wrongdoing. Those who know Landow say it is just the kind of thing he would do..... "

NewsMax.com 7/1/99 Carl Limbacher "...Has Ken Starr been blackmailed by the Clinton Justice Department into short-circuiting his prosecution of Webster Hubbell? That's the inference one might draw from what Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman said on Monday: "With the recent offer of Janet Reno to drop all ethics probes of Starr's office if he and his prosecutors would end their investigations, as published a few weeks ago by Robert Suro in the Washington Post, it is clear the independent counsel is bailing out. It is sad to say that Starr's latest retreat coincides with the death of the independent counsel law this Wednesday." In fact, Monday's news that Starr has let Hubbell off the hook with a deal that involves no jail time and apparently no cooperation is more than sad. It's downright eerie, given the way circumstances around the Hubbell plea bargain resemble the blackmail scheme hinted at in that June 6 Washington Post report: "The Justice Department has put its misconduct investigation of independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr on hold while waiting to see whether Starr resigns or significantly curtails his activities after the independent counsel law expires on June 30, according to sources familiar with the deliberations."

http://www.arktimes.com/990723coverstory.html 7/23/99 "...In Carrying a remarkable signed promise that Kenneth W. Starr would never again prosecute or investigate him, his family or his friends, Webb Hubbell read a short, emotional statement in front of the federal courthouse in Washington June 30, took his wife by the arm and shambled away. He didn't answer questions.... On June 30, Hubbell pled guilty to one count of not being truthful to federal banking regulators in an effort to keep legal business for his law firm 10 years ago and to a single count of failing to make payments on his huge federal income tax liability while he was in prison. After his unrelenting pursuit of Clinton's old pal and Hillary's law partner, Starr in the end was satisfied with a $125 assessment. He dropped the rest of a 15-count indictment and tax charges against Hubbell, his wife, Suzy, and his accountant and Little Rock tax attorney. Starr said justice had been served..... "

AP 9/13/99 "....In a victory for Kenneth Starr, a federal appeals court today overturned a judge's ruling that the independent counsel's office should face criminal contempt proceedings for an alleged leak of grand jury information in the Monica Lewinsky case. The court panel voted to strike down a ruling by U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson that appointed the Justice Department to prosecute Starr's office on the contempt charge. ...At issue is an article in The New York Times that disclosed Starr's office had concluded that a sitting president could be indicted. Johnson concluded the disclosure violated grand jury disclosure rules...."

Associated Press 9/13/99 Pete Yost "....A federal appeals court on Monday overturned a previously secret ruling that Kenneth Starr's office be prosecuted by the Justice Department for alleged grand jury leaks to the news media. The decision, which President Clinton's lawyer said he will seek to appeal, undercut one of the most frequent complaints by the president's defenders against Starr - that he leaks grand jury information to the press. In a 3-0 vote, the appeals court reversed U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson who directed that the Justice Department act as prosecutor for civil and possibly criminal contempt proceedings she ordered against Starr's office as well as its former spokesman, Charles Bakaly, for leaking a story to The New York Times. The Times' story on Jan. 31, amid the Senate impeachment trial, stated that Starr had decided he had the authority to seek an indictment against the president while Clinton was still in office. "We conclude that the disclosures made in The New York Times article do not constitute a prima facie violation'' of the grand jury secrecy rule, said the court. "Information actually presented to the grand jury is core'' grand jury secrecy "material that is afforded the broadest protection from disclosure,'' said the three judges. But "prosecutors' statements about their investigation, however, implicate the'' secrecy "rule only when they directly reveal grand jury matters,'' the court added. The ruling may prove helpful to Starr regarding other allegations of grand jury leaks leveled by Clinton lawyer David Kendall in the Monica Lewinsky investigation. Johnson ruled last year that there were 24 instances of possible grand jury leaks by Starr's office. Some of those dealt with negotiations with Lewinsky's lawyers and were not matters before the grand jury. ....."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 9/16/99 Jerry Seper "....A secret investigative report handed over to the chief judge of the U.S. District Court in Washington -- but never made public --clears independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr and his staff of leaking grand jury information to the media in the Monica Lewinsky investigation. Senior Appeals Court Judge John W. Kern III reached that conclusion in a report that was delivered to Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson but was kept under seal. Judge Kern had been named in January to find out whether Mr. Starr or his staff should face criminal contempt charges concerning 24 media stories. The Kern report follows a federal appeals court order on Monday that overturned a separate ruling by Judge Johnson. Judge Johnson's ruling ordered Mr. Starr to face criminal contempt proceedings in the suspected leak of a story not included in the original 24. The appeals panel said the judge used the wrong standard for determining there was sufficient preliminary evidence of an illegal leak. Judge Johnson's overturned ruling related to a Jan. 31 article in the New York Times that said Mr. Starr believed a sitting president could be indicted. Judge Johnson said the disclosure violated grand jury secrecy rules -- a ruling the court panel rejected 3-0. According to a lawyer who has not read the document but is familiar with its contents, the Kern report clears Mr. Starr and his staff of White House charges they illegally leaked information for the 24 Lewinsky stories. ...."

AP 10/15/99 Pete Yost "....A 39-year-old assistant to Kenneth Starr will take over the final phase of the independent counsel's controversial investigation that led to the impeachment of President Clinton, say sources familiar with Starr's plans. Starr will formally step aside next week and be replaced by Robert Ray, an assistant U.S. attorney who worked for Independent Counsel Donald Smaltz in the probe of ex-Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy, say the sources, who are allies of Starr. "It's somewhat of a dubious proposition that someone involved both in the Espy investigation and the Starr operation'' is "getting a promotion,'' White House spokesman Joe Lockhart said today....... Starr's office has two pending investigative matters: -An alleged attempt to influence the testimony of presidential accuser Kathleen Willey. -Possible false statements regarding Hillary Rodham Clinton's role in the purge of White House travel office employees. In addition, Starr's successor must produce a final report on the Whitewater scandal - a document that could prove to be a political headache for Mrs. Clinton if she follows through on plans to run next year for a U.S. Senate seat from New York. .....During Starr's tenure, his office convicted 14 people, including the Clintons' Whitewater business partners, Jim and Susan McDougal, then-Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, who resigned his office, and former associate attorney general Webster Hubbell, the first lady's former law partner. Starr's investigation of the Lewinsky scandal - the president's affair and subsequent cover-up - led to the first presidential impeachment since 1868. ...."

Drudge 10/15/99 "…According to publishing sources, the NEW YORK TIMES will report in Saturday editions that "lawyers involved with the [Office of the Indepenent Counsel] inquiry said Friday that the office has intensified its investigation into matters that could still prove difficult for the White House." TIMES scribes David Johnson and Don Van Natta reveal that in recent weeks the Kathleen Willey and travel office inquiries have heated up -- a trend that has been "accompanied by a change in leadership at the independent counsel's office." …."

NY Times 10/16/99 David Johnston Don Van Natta Jr. "….The investigation has recently ratcheted up, the lawyers said on Friday, as prosecutors have centered renewed attention on trying to determine whether White House aides played any role in what a former White House volunteer, Kathleen E. Willey, has said was an effort to persuade her to deny that the President made a sexual advance to her in the Oval Office….In addition, the lawyers said prosecutors were continuing to pursue what they saw as their still-open inquiry into the dismissals of White House travel office employees in the early months of the Clinton Presidency. They are also investigating whether anyone involved in the matter at the White House misled investigators about who had ordered the ouster of the employees…..Prosecutors from the independent counsel's office have subpoenaed several associates of Landow to testify before a Federal grand jury in Alexandria, Va., away from the media glare of the District of Columbia Federal courthouse, one lawyer with knowledge of the activity said. Moreover, agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation assigned to the independent counsel's office have recently subpoenaed Landow's telephone logs and business records in what appears to be an effort to find a connection between him and White House aides, the lawyer said….."

AP 10/18/99 Pete Yost "....At Starr's office, where he started working early this year, Ray helped prosecute longtime presidential friend Webster Hubbell. .....If Mrs. Clinton follows through on plans to run for the Senate, her legal work on the project could prove politically troublesome in Ray's final report on the six-year, $50 million-plus probe of the Clintons. Ray is ``a decent guy and I think he'll make a good replacement for Starr,'' said William Gardner, a defense lawyer who represented several clients in the Espy investigation. ``He's not a zealot and he's not particularly political,'' said attorney Barry Coburn, a former prosecutor who worked with Ray for several years in Smaltz's office. ``I don't know his political orientation to this day,'' Coburn said of Ray. ``He's a prosecutor's prosecutor with good people skills and excellent judgment.'' Ray ``has a high level of credibility; if he didn't know something, he said he didn't know,'' said U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey of New York, who presided over two cocaine conspiracy jury trials Ray won as an assistant U.S. attorney in Manhattan. ....."

 

Capitol Hill Blue 10/23/99 ".....President Clinton Friday asked the full 12-judge bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals to reconsider a ruling that the apparent leak of information about a possible indictment of the president did not violate grand jury secrecy. The case centers around a Jan. 31 New York Times story reporting that Independent Counsel Ken Starr's office was considering whether to indict Clinton for perjury and obstruction of justice for his statements in the Paula Jones civil deposition and the Monica Lewinsky criminal investigation. The article was attributed, in large part, to "associates of Starr" and it described discussions about the matter within Starr's office. (Starr resigned this week and was replaced by Robert Ray, one of his deputies.) A three-judge panel of the appeals court ruled last month that the information contained in the story did not disclose anything that had transpired or was about to transpire before the grand jury. "Internal deliberations of prosecutors that do not directly reveal grand jury proceedings" are not covered by the grand jury secrecy rule, the court said......"

Newsweek 11/8/99 Bill Greenblatt UPI "….As White House aides expressed their glee when Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr resigned last month, one top official broke ranks, offering Starr fulsome praise. Within days of Starr's departure to write a book on the Supreme Court, NEWSWEEK has learned, FBI Director Louis Freeh sent Starr a gushing letter lauding his "dedicated service to the nation" and his "persistence and uncompromising personal and professional integrity." Without mentioning Bill Clinton, Freeh made a number of pointed allusions to his boss's indiscretions. "You have always respected the truth and have never engaged in any misleading or evasive conduct or practice," Freeh wrote. "Your objective has always been the promotion of justice and the safeguarding of the judicial process." ….."

AP 10/31/99 "..... A few days after Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr left his post, FBI Director Louis Freeh sent him a letter praising his work and his personal integrity, according to a published report. ``You have always respected the truth and have never engaged in any misleading or evasive conduct or practice,'' Freeh wrote, Newsweek magazine reports in its Nov. 8. ``Your objective has always been the promotion of justice and the safeguarding of the judicial process.'' ...."

NewsMax.com 11/9/99 Carl Limbacher "….Could there be major Clinton scandal bombshells yet to explode? That's what recently retired independent counsel Kenneth Starr seemed to suggest Tuesday night, in an exclusive interview with Fox News Channel's Paula Zahn. Travelgate and alleged attempts to intimidate Clinton assault victim Kathleen Willey remain under active investigation. But the all encompassing Whitewater probe, which covered those areas as well as Vince Foster's death, Filegate and Sexgate, was thought to be winding down. Starr bluntly indicated that there were "major facts" yet to be revealed when questioned directly by the Fox host:

ZAHN: Is there a lot more about this investigation that we're not privy too; that we're going to hear more about in the months to come? Or do we basically know all the major facts?

STARR: No, you do not. There are still aspects of the investigation that are underway. I can't comment on them. It's now out of my hands and in the good hands of (newly appointed Independent Counsel) Bob Ray. So I would just say, let's allow him to do his work in a professional way.

ZAHN: Can you tell us if any of that information you've been privy to could possibly lead to more indictments?

STARR: I don't think I should be commenting with respect to that. But there were active phases of the investigation when I was still the independent counsel. But that's now three weeks ago….."

The Commercial Appeal 11/14/99 Bill Dries "….. After six years of investigating the Whitewater land dealings of President Clinton, deputy independent counsel W. Hickman Ewing Jr. has developed a passable impersonation of Clinton. As independent counsel Kenneth Starr and his staff prepared to question Clinton for grand jury testimony, Ewing played Clinton in rehearsals. "I'd seen a lot of game film on Clinton, and I'd read the 25 books on him and interviewed him a number of times myself," Ewing told a crowd of 50 Saturday at The Dutch Treat Luncheon in East Memphis... Ewing's part of the investigation dealt with Whitewater for the most part and is based in Little Rock. Ewing, who maintains a home in Germantown, estimates it will wrap up in about six months. Eventually, he said, he will talk more openly about the investigation, just as Clinton has vowed to do after he leaves the White House….."

Washington Post 12/18/99 Charles Babington "….President Clinton is strongly considering making a request for government reimbursement of several million dollars in legal expenses associated with the Whitewater and Monica S. Lewinsky investigations, a move the independent counsel's office is already preparing to challenge, knowledgeable legal sources said yesterday. If successful, Clinton and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton could eliminate most or all of their $5 million in unpaid legal bills, the balance of a sum that once exceeded $10 million…."

American Spectator 2/96 James Ring Adams R Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. "…..The story starts not with the McDougals' Madison Guaranty, but with a small-town bank in Stephens, Arkansas, in the southern tier of the state. On April 3, 1985, the Stephens Security Bank lent $135,000 to James and Susan McDougal for their Flowerwood Farms real estate development in western PuIaski County, some too miles north. It's not clear why this small bank made such a large commitment outside its immediate lending area, but Stephens Security did have connections with the Little Rock elite. Until 1984 more than 90 percent of its stock was owned by First Arkansas Bankstock Corp., the predecessor to the Worthen Banking Corporation. Some corporate matters for Stephens Security were handled by C. Joseph Giroir, Jr, who as chairmam an of th e Rose Law Firm hired Hillary Clinton in 1978. Stephens Security Bank president Richard T. Smith, a former loan officer at Worthen, had his own history of questionable political lending. In 1484 he a pproved $150,000 in loans to the last minute congressional campaign of Little Rock Sheriff Tommy Robinson, even though Robinson never filled out a loan applcation. The Federal Election Commission investigated the loans but deadlocked on wheth er to take action about them.

American Spectator 2/96 James Ring Adams R Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. "…..The Wall Street Journal reported in August 1994 that Denton was telling the staff of the independent counsel that in 1986 he had seen her name, signed "Hillary Rodham," on a loan of between $100,000 and $300,000, but that the usual form for a guarantee was missing. At the time of the WSJ article, Clinton lawyer David Kendall issued the memorable but partial denial, "Any allegation that Mrs. Clinton guaranteed a loan in 1986 with the signature 'Hillary Rodham has the unmistakable and clanging ring of falsity." (The loan would have been signed in 1985, not 1986.) More recently, however, Denton's memory has freshened, and he has reportedly given an affidavit to Independent Counsel Kenneth Stan stating that he was in the room when Hillary signed the loan. Curiously, nothing resembling this note turned up in the thousands of documents produced for the House Banking Committee, partly because Stephens Security fell out of the purview of the investigations of Madison. But there is another possible reason that this note has not surfaced. It would be one of the most damaging bits of evidence yet to emerge against the first family…… This whole sequence of loans, from Stephens Security to Flowerwood Farms and the repayment from David Hale, caught the eye of investigators as soon as the Madison Guaranty case was reopened in 1992. It figured prominently in the first criminal referral from jean Lewis, the RTC criminal investigator from Kansas City who bore the brunt of keeping the Madison case alive. (This referral, number C0004 went to the FBI and U.S. attorney in Little Rock on September 2, 1992, and promptly disappeared into the Washington bureaucracy. ) Then-U.S. Attorney Charles Banks recently told the Senate Whitewater Committee that he rushed the referral out of his office without even reading its 300 a ttached exhibits. He admitted that he shied away from the politically charged case because, among other things, he was a candidate for a federal judgeship….."

USA Today 1/10/00 "..... Robert Ray, the federal prosecutor who inherited Starr's job, says he knows what most Americans are probably thinking: '' 'We went through this. We had this trial. What are you still doing here?' '' Ray's answer: ''It ain't over till it's over.'' Facing this relatively unknown prosecutor, who won't turn 40 until April, is one of the most potentially explosive decisions of the entire investigation: whether to seek Clinton's indictment for perjury after he leaves office next January. Ray refuses to discuss that. But in a wide-ranging interview last week, he made it clear he's more than a caretaker. He's required to deliver final reports on the whole inventory of Clinton scandals, and it's not just a writing job. ''The investigation continues,'' he says.......Ray is replacing some lawyers who are leaving his staff and says he's recruiting people who can help him decide ''whether or not to bring charges'' in connection with the various investigations. Ray is under orders from the three-judge panel that chose him as Starr's successor to end the probe with ''all deliberate speed.'' ....."

AP wire 1/26/2000 Anne Geargan "….On the eve of his last State of the Union address, President Clinton said Wednesday the independent counsel investigation that shadowed most of his presidency was "bogus," but he apologized anew for the Monica Lewinsky debacle. "First of all, I made one mistake. I apologized for it, I paid a high price for it and I've done my best to atone for it by being a good president," Clinton said in a television interview. "But I believe we also endured what history will clearly record was a bogus investigation, where there was nothing to Whitewater or these other charges." ….Clinton asserted that Republicans in Congress used the six-year Whitewater investigation as a political cudgel, even when they knew neither Clinton nor first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton had done anything wrong. "They knew it was a bunch of bull. They had no evidence," Clinton said in an interview with PBS host Jim Lehrer. The interview was taped at the White House Wednesday afternoon and broadcast Wednesday evening….."

 

The Washington Weekly 2/20/95 Marvin Lee "….. Feb. 20, 1995 Marvin Lee - Interview of Judge Jim Johnson …….. MR. LEE: In your assessment, has Bill Clinton committed indictable crimes in Arkansas or in Washington, and is there currently sufficient evidence for an indictment?

JUDGE JOHNSON: Yes. Judge David Hale is a friend of mine. I have known his family for three generations. His deceased brother, John, was one of my strongest supporters. Some years ago David was elected National President of the Jaycees, which was quite an honor for our little state. The Hale family was a meaningful part of the Clinton Administration when he was Governor of Arkansas. Clinton appointed David to a municipal judgeship. At the time, David owned a modest lending institution, a MESBIC, which was licensed by the Small Business Administration to make government guaranteed loans to disadvantaged people - people who couldn't obtain credit in the usual course of commerce. Clinton wanted to borrow $300,000 dollars for the Whitewater development. He and his wife owned the development partnership with Jim McDougal and his wife Susan. The McDougal's owned Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan. Clinton brought pressure to bear on Hale to make the loan, despite the fact that none of the partners qualified as disadvantaged for purposes of the MESBIC loan. It was agreed that the loan would be made out in the name of Mrs. Susan McDougal. In the application they qualified her as disadvantaged, at a time when she and her husband were reputed to have a net worth in excess of two or two and one-half million dollars.

The loan was approved, and much of the proceeds went into the Whitewater development. When the loan was not repaid, under the guarantee, the taxpayers funds made Hale's company whole. The Small Business Administration then sent their auditors down to Little Rock to check on Hale's lending company. They found the fraudulent activity, and turned their findings over to the Federal grand jury. The grand jury returned a felony indictment against Hale for conspiracy to defraud the government of the United States.

Since Hale was the only one indicted in this transaction, and since you can't "conspire" alone, Hale went to the Assistant U.S. Attorney who had been assigned the case and offered to make a clean breast of all his wrongdoing. He was told that the government knew of the prominent people involved in the matter with him, and that he was the only one they were going to prosecute. Hale then went to the newspapers, and they printed the story that he had offered to turn state's evidence in the next morning's edition. When I read the article, I wrote Hale a personal note and told him that it looked like he had been hung out to dry; that they meant for him to take the fall for all of them. Hale came to see me the next day, and almost every day for some time thereafter. Hale admitted to me his wrongdoing, and assured me that he had the documented evidence which would convict the President of the United States and his wife for the felony of having conspired to defraud the government of the United States. I told him that with the influence the Clinton Administration and their friends had in the Federal Court system here in Arkansas that the only chance he had to help himself and his country was to see that all the facts were made available to the major news outlets throughout the world. I helped him get that project in motion, and it wasn't long until the Special Prosecutor was anxious to make a deal with him. He is now under the Federal Witness Protection Program. I have sent him four communications since he has been in negotiations, but have not talked to him personally since he was last at my home.

Fox News 2/6/00 Dick Morris Freeper M Peach reporting "….Just watching Fox News, and Morris is claiming that Ray will reopen the case against Jim Guy Tucker, because he was allegedly paid of by Riady for his silence against Clinton in the Whitewater matter. Morris claims that he got immunity under Starr when he answered he received no money from Riady. But apparently, evidence has just surfaced to suggest that in fact he was, and under the new prosecutor Ray, Tucker's immunity could be voided by this latest disclosure Morris claims that Ray now has the obligation to call Tucker in and ask him for the truth - Morris says this should happen within the next few months - ….."

 

ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE 2/24/00 Linda Satter "….. The Office of the Independent Counsel has a new legal entanglement in Arkansas. On Tuesday, a Pulaski County woman filed a lawsuit against the United States over a "violent collision" allegedly caused by an employee of former independent counsel Kenneth Starr in Little Rock in January 1998. Starr, along with some staff members, was in Little Rock then as part of his wide-ranging investigation of business dealings of President Clinton, his wife and others in the 1980s. That investigation included a Marion County land deal known as Whitewater. Because the employee, Shirley A. Ferrin, was an employee of Starr's office and was "acting within the scope of her employment," the government should have to pay $50,184 in compensatory damages for her knee injury, Vicki Jane Carver asserted. ……The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Bill Wilson, a Clinton appointee who in 1994 recused from presiding over a case against former Justice Department official Webb Hubbell that grew out of Starr's Whitewater investigation. Starr has since left the Office of the Independent Counsel. ……"

AP/CNN 2/22/00 "…..Whitewater prosecutors are asking the Supreme Court to preserve presidential friend Webster Hubbell's guilty plea to a misdemeanor tax charge, in a case that seeks to clarify the reach of some grants of immunity from prosecution. The prosecutors want the justices to rule they could use documents against Hubbell that he was forced to produce under a limited grant of immunity. Hubbell's lawyers say the grant of immunity means the documents he turned over were "hopelessly tainted" and therefore could not be used as evidence. After Tuesday's argument, a decision is expected by July. ….. The Constitution's Fifth Amendment protects people from having to testify against themselves, but it does not protect them from having to turn over documents, new independent counsel Robert W. Ray said in court papers. Ray took over the independent counsel's job from Kenneth Starr last October. …."

Associated Press 2/22/00 Laurie Asseo "….Several Supreme Court justices today questioned the prosecution of presidential friend Webster Hubbell using documents he was forced to provide under a limited grant of immunity. "Did the government know about the contents of the documents beforehand?" Justice Sandra Day O'Connor asked Whitewater prosecutors' lawyer, Ronald J. Mann. "It was only by virtue of the production of the documents that you learned the facts that enabled you to carry out the prosecution." Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested that "the immunity that you gave him immunized nothing. If that was the case, wasn't there a certain deception involved?" Hubbell pleaded guilty last year to a misdemeanor tax charge based partly on financial papers he was required to give Whitewater prosecutors under limited immunity. Mann argued for new Independent Counsel Robert W. Ray, who took over the job from Kenneth Starr last October…… Several justices questioned how turning over documents differs from being forced to provide blood or handwriting samples or stand in a police lineup - all of which can be required. ….."

OIC 2/22/00 "….. Independent Counsel Robert W. Ray issued the following statement today: The Office of the Independent Counsel, with the Department of Justice arguing in full support, went before the Supreme Court today to ensure that a prosecutor's access to ordinary business and tax records in a criminal investigation is sustained. It is well established that the Fifth Amendment applies only to compelled testimony, not to the compelled production of physical objects, including documents. The Government argued that whenever it compels production of ordinary business and tax records by granting limited act of production immunity, and does not use the testimony of the suspect in any way, it does not infringe on a suspect's privilege against compelled self-incrimination. Because the Government did not make use of any compelled testimony related to the contents of the documents, the United States left Mr. Hubbell in substantially the same position under the Fifth Amendment as he would have been in absent the grant of immunity. The United States's position in this matter, if accepted by the Supreme Court, will help prosecutors ensure that tax fraud and other white collar crimes that are evident from a review of ordinary business and tax records do not escape prosecution. ….."

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, page 9B 2/16/00 "……The Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct on Tuesday dropped a disbarment action against Little Rock lawyer Charles Haley after a Pulaski County judge refused to delay the trial. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza declined to grant the request for a continuance by lawyers for the committee. The committee contended it needed more time to bring former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker from Indonesia to testify, court officials said. Tucker is also facing possible disbarment. By dropping, or "non-suiting" the case, the committee may refile the action……. The committee filed the disbarment action Dec. 8, 1999, against Haley, citing his guilty plea to Whitewater prosecutors in 1998. The federal indictment said Tucker put assets of his cable television company into anoter company that Tucker took into a "sham" bankruptcy to reduce the amount of taxable gains when it was sold. Hales was accused of designing the scheme, which helped Tucker avoid millions of dollars in taxes. ….."

The Associated Press 3/10/00 Pete Yost "…..In court papers unsealed Friday, a former White House contractor says she was warned not to reveal a problem with the White House e-mail system that concealed thousands of messages from the Justice Department and congressional investigators……. Asked to comment Friday, the office of Starr's successor, Independent Counsel Robert Ray, said, "We are aware of the allegations regarding the e-mail issue, and we are taking appropriate steps with regard to those allegations. "Beyond that we can't comment," said Neille Mallon Russell, a spokeswoman for Ray's office…… She said Lindsay specified that she was not to tell even her private-sector boss, Steve Hawkins, who she said eventually removed her from her White House assignment when she refused to tell him about the e-mail problem. ……… "Lindsay and others on the Clinton White House staff who knew why I wasn't telling Hawkins about the e-mail problem never intervened with Hawkins to protect my job," Lambuth said in the declaration. ...... "

Insight Magazine 3/10/00 Paul Rodriguez "…….The explosive affidavit by Betty Lambuth, filed under seal in late February before District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, not only confirms details of a story that was first reported by Insight magazine in December 1998 and January 1999, but goes on to detail threats by White House lawyers to punish any employee who revealed the existence of the secret e-mails even to White House staff in charge of computer-system operations. …….. It is Hall's latest affidavit delivered to Judge Lamberth on March 10, however, that contains the rocket sure to send sparks through Congress and the White House concerning a secret operation to destroy confidential computer records. ……. Although the senior staff of the House Government Reform Committee knew of the so-called lost e-mails and the White House's attempts to conceal the discovery of the priceless data from many investigators, the materials were neither sought nor subpoenaed by the committee. That is, until early March 2000 when the Washington Times picked up the original Insight stories from two years ago (see "news alert!" March 13) and, separately, Dan Burton confirmed that at least five government contract employees had been threatened with loss of jobs and/or jail time if ever they revealed the information. …….. Besides the Burton committee, the FBI Campaign Task Force and the Office of Independent Counsel Ray (who succeeded Ken Starr) now are on the trail of the e-mails and long-distance telephone records. Although agents from the Campaign Task Force actually had meetings with White House lawyers shortly after the original Insight stories broke, they reportedly failed to follow up. "I promise you, we'll get these records now," a high-level federal law-enforcement official said, March 10. ...... The latest revelations, plus new ones not yet revealed to the court or Congress, have rattled the White House and angered members of Congress in both political parties. Burton is expected to conduct hearings shortly on the entire matter and, as Insight sources say, work already has begun to depose current and former contract employees who worked at the White House and claim to have been threatened by senior Clinton staff and lawyers. ......The Justice Department Campaign Finance Task Force, along with Independent Counsel Ray, also are preparing new batches of subpoenas, Insight has learned, based on the latest revelations and, in particular, a review of notes from meetings with White House lawyers who said such records did not exist when, in fact, they did. ……"

AP 3/6/00 "……Independent Counsel Robert W. Ray announced the appointment Monday of two new Whitewater prosecutors, including an attorney who worked for a House committee that has been investigating the Clinton administration. Jennifer M. Safavian formerly was deputy staff director for the census subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee. The full committee has spent years investigating the administration. John S. Bowler worked for the criminal division of the U.S. attorney's office in Raleigh, N.C. Ray's staff is closing out its investigation and compiling final reports on various aspects of the six-year probe of Whitewater-related land deals in Arkansas, the purge of the White House travel office and the White House's improper gathering of FBI background files on hundreds of employees and presidential appointees from Republican administrations. ……"

 

NY Times 3/13/00 William Safire "…..Ray's Round Two is scheduled to be submitted to a three-judge panel in early summer. That will deal with "Travelgate," the alleged abuses of power by Hillary and presidential aides in the prosecution of innocent (and quickly acquitted) longtime White House employees to make way for Clinton patronage. Because active investigation continues, which Reno Justice cannot obstruct, I presume Hillary Clinton faces far greater problems with Travelgate than with Filegate. …."

NY Times 3/13/00 William Safire "…..Round Three has to do with Whitewater and the missing Rose Law Firm files; its wrap-up was long sidetracked by the Lewinsky scandal. Though planned for transmittal before Labor Day, the "full description" of the investigation called for in the law -- which I sense will detail tawdry corner-cutting and egregious evasiveness but not prosecutable crime -- is unlikely to have great impact on elections...…"

NY Times 3/13/00 William Safire "…..The above planning is newsworthy, but here's the stunner: There will be a fourth round early next year about Bill Clinton's conduct in sexual harassment cases. It will take the form of a "full description" in lieu of prosecution or be a grand jury indictment. What triggers that unthinkable thought is Ray's hiring of two new prosecutors last week. Logic suggests that their purpose is to position the independent counsel for a prosecutorial decision next January. Note that Federal Judge Susan Webber Wright refrained from citing Clinton for criminal contempt for willfully misleading her court in the Paula Jones case. That would have "double-jeopardied out," as lawyers say, a criminal charge against the perpetrator by the independent counsel. ….."

NY Times 3/13/00 Neil Lewis "…..Beginning as early as this week and continuing for several months, the special prosecutor for Whitewater matters, Robert W. Ray, will begin filing with a federal court a series of final reports on his office's investigations involving President Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton, lawyers who have been informed of the plan said this weekend. The lawyers, who are not part of the special counsel's team, said the first such report, concerning the improper acquisition by the Clinton White House of about 900 Federal Bureau of Investigation files, including many dossiers of prominent Republicans, is expected to conclude that there was no criminal wrongdoing and that the episode occurred because of a series of unwitting mistakes initiated by a low-level White House security officer……"

NY Times 3/13/00 Neil Lewis "…..As the reports become public, they could also pose questions for Vice President Al Gore about the behavior of the Clinton administration. In addition, the lawyers outside the office say, Mr. Ray has not yet resolved the issue of whether Mr. Clinton could be charged with crimes after he leaves office. The lawyers who are familiar with the operations of the office said that Mr. Ray and his associates were planning to take yet another look at that question. ……"

 

Judicial Watch 3/13/00 "……Inexplicable and perhaps improper leaks of the upcoming Independent Counsel's report on Filegate confirm Judicial Watch's criticism of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, and new, but not seen, Independent Counsel Bob Ray. Judicial Watch, in the course of its investigations on behalf of those whose FBI files were misused, discovered that neither Ken Starr nor Bob Ray have interviewed or called before the grand jury key witnesses in the burgeoning Filegate scandal, including but not limited to Linda Tripp, who witnessed FBI file misuse; Thomas "Mack" McLarty, former White House Chief of Staff during Filegate; Terry Good, Director of the Office of Records Management, who stored Privacy Act materials, including FBI files, for the Clinton-Gore White House, and others….."

Insightmag,com 3/14/00 Andrew Marshall "…. The possibility that Bill Clinton might be prosecuted when he leaves office was raised anew yesterday, signalling a fresh wave of legal concerns for the United States President and his wife, Hillary. The idea of an indictment has been around for some time, but speculation had died away as the smoke from last year's impeachment proceedings cleared. Now, the office of the independent counsel investigating the White House has floated the idea again in a series of briefings to the US media. It amounts to a shot across Mr Clinton's bows. The New York Times and CNN both reported yesterday that Robert Ray, the successor to Kenneth Starr, is "actively exploring" whether to seek indictments against Mr Clinton. He cannot be indicted while President. But once a private citizen, he might be charged with perjury or with suborning perjury by persuading Monica Lewinsky to lie about her relationship with him, and might conceivably be tried. ......"

NewsMax.com 3/14/00 "……. The newspaper's sources say that Ray's investigators found no smoking-gun evidence of criminal wrongdoing -- that the accumulation of files on Republicans and other Clinton administration critics was due primarily to "mistakes" by low-level White House bureaucrats. ……. "The leaked Ray report is scandalous in and of itself," according to Judicial Watch. "Since the FBI is a defendant in Judicial Watch's $90 million dollar class action lawsuit, [on behalf of some of those whose files were obtained by the White House] and since the Ray report is based upon the FBI's so-called investigation, it is not worth the paper it is written upon, and is a total disgrace, if, indeed, its findings are as reported this morning in the New York Times." Ray's report will be issued Friday, said Neille Russell, a spokeswoman for the independent counsel. ………… If the report reaches the conclusion reported in the Times, it will be viewed as an exoneration of Hillary Clinton wrote Times columnist Bill Safire. ……. Such a claim flies in the face of a mass of evidence gathered by the Judicial Watch probers. Moreover, the release of a final report on the matter comes at a time when startling new evidence has been uncovered, according to Klayman. ......"

WorldNetDaily 3/14/00 Paul Sperry "……It looks like TV news isn't the only one backing off Hall's compelling story, WorldNetDaily has learned. Independent Counsel Bob Ray, who took over for Kenneth Starr, has yet to contact Hall to get her story. Though some of his prosecutors met with Judicial Watch about two weeks ago, they haven't followed up. "Mr. Ray isn't interested in meeting with Ms. Hall, it looks like," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Ray's office wouldn't talk about its plans, saying only that it's "aware of the e-mail allegations and is taking appropriate steps with regard to" them. Some 5,000 or more e-mails are tied to Lewinsky. If the White House tried to hide them from Starr, it's relevant to his obstruction case. Is the case still open? Ray's spokeswoman Neille Russell suggested that it is. "We sent findings to the House Judiciary Committee, (but) no final report has gone to the special division on that," Russell told WorldNetDaily, referring to 1998's House impeachment hearings. ……… Fitton is puzzled that Ray's office wouldn't hold off on filing the report until it sifts through the missing White House e-mail, which Hall claims includes references to Filegate. "I mean, what's going on here?" Fitton said in an interview. ….."

New York Times 3/25/00 Melinda Henneberger "……..Kenneth W. Starr's replacement, the man with the power to prosecute the president after he leaves office -- and, potentially, to affect the outcome of a close New York Senate race -- goes about his business here in almost perfect anonymity. "I don't think I've been noticed yet," says Robert Ray, the 39-year-old career prosecutor who took over as independent counsel last October and appeared on national television for the first time this week. ……… "Somebody has to do this," he said when first asked about his job. He also said, "It's time to bring this to closure." ……"

NewsMax.com 3/21/00 Carl Limbacher "…….. Yesterday, Judicial Watch filed a complaint, under the Freedom of Information Act, to obtain documentation from the Office of Independent Counsel concerning his so-called "investigation" of the Filegate scandal. In recent days, Robert Ray, the Democrat successor and former deputy to Ken Starr, leaked and then forwarded a report on Filegate, before his office even bothered to interview key witnesses, such as Linda Tripp, who testified to Judicial Watch and the Court to having observed FBI files being loaded onto Clinton-Gore White House computers, at the direction of Hillary Clinton. Further, Ray issued the Filegate Report, despite recent revelations from White House whistleblowers that as much as 1,000,000 e-mail [and 457 hard drive cartridges] -- containing incriminating information about Filegate and other Clinton-Gore scandals -- were suppressed by the Clinton-Gore White House. Further, officials in the Clinton-Gore White House threatened the whistleblowers and others not to reveal this, or they would be sent to jail. Such actions constitute obstruction of justice. Yesterday, Ray appeared on ABC's "This Week" and, under questioning from Sam Donaldson, effectively admitted that he did not interview key witnesses, or meet with the whistleblowers (much more conduct a full investigation), before leaking and then issuing his Filegate Report. ……"

CBSNEWS.COM 3/20/00 AP "……The independent counsel wrapping up the investigation of President Clinton says he has not ruled out filing criminal charges and is bringing in investigators from the FBI and other agencies to help him decide. In a television interview Sunday, Robert Ray said he has not determined Mr. Clinton's possible criminal liability. It was the first time he publicly discussed the possibility that the president might be prosecuted in the Monica Lewinsky matter. ……."

Washington Times 3/21/00 "……. Based on a report filed with a three judge panel by independent counsel Robert Ray last week, the nearly four year investigation has determined there was "no substantial and credible evidence that any senior White House official, or first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, was involved in seeking confidential Federal Bureau of Investigation background reports of former White House staff from the administrations of Presidents Reagan and Bush." The investigation also concluded, according to a statement issued by Mr. Ray, that prosecutors found no evidence showing that then-White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum lied to Congress about the administration's hiring of the demonstrably unqualified Craig Livingstone, a former bar bouncer who gathered the FBI files as White House security chief. Finally, Mr. Ray said the investigation found no evidence showing that Mrs. Clinton was involved in Mr. Livingstone's hiring……….. The White House is undoubtedly pleased with the conclusions of last week's independent counsel report, which was filed under seal with a three-judge panel pending a 90-day response period available to those mentioned in the report. Until the three federal appeals court judges who sit on the special panel publicly release the report, however, it is impossible to know how prosecutors reconciled testimony and evidence from extremely reliable FBI and Secret Service agents that conflicted with statements from officials of the most corrupt and politicized White House in decades……."

Judicial Watch 3/21/00 "…….Last Friday, March 17, 2000, Representative Bob Barr of the 7th District of Georgia, and a member of the House Judiciary and Government Reform Committees, sent a letter to Robert Ray, the Independent Counsel who has just leaked and forwarded his report on Filegate. In this letter, which was copied on the three-judge panel overseeing the Independent Counsel's investigations, as well as the Honorable Henry Hyde and Dan Burton, Mr. Barr questions the thoroughness and integrity of Mr. Ray's investigation. A copy of the letter can be found on the Congressman's website at: www.house.gov/barr, as well as the website of his counsel at www.JudicialWatch.org......."Congressman Barr is the only public servant that Judicial Watch has encountered, with the exception of a few judges, who has the courage to always do what is right. It is clear that something is terribly wrong with the Ray Filegate Report, and Congressman Barr is dedicated to looking into it," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman. ….."

Patrick Henry Center 3/21/00 Gary Aldrich "……. Nearly four years after the discovery that violations of privacy of more than 900 Americans in the FBI-file-stealing case occurred, Mr. Ray wrongly concludes the entire matter was caused by "the gross incompetence of the mid-level White House staff and the laxity of eager-to-please FBI officials." Amazingly, he buys Hillary Clinton's story that she did not hire nor even recommend the hiring of Craig Livingstone! The gross incompetence here is not on the part of White House officials - it's on the part of Mr. Ray's office! ……….. Furthermore, how Mr. Ray could find any former or current Clinton White House employee or resident more credible than your average FBI or Secret Service agent is a wonder to behold. Moreover, Mr. Ray missed or ignored important evidence, some of it very new - all of it very credible. ......... For example, I was the first to report to the public that Hillary hired Craig Livingstone, in my book, Unlimited Access (page 36) long before it was an issue. My partner, Dennis Sculimbrene wrote an official FBI report about Hillary's connection way back in 1993, long before the true nature of the corruption of the White House was suspected. Other federal agents made statements under oath to Congress, that the FBI files were obtained illegally, for no good purpose - and told of their knowledge of the hiring of Livingstone - that Hillary wanted him. Which one of these credible witnesses appeared in Ray's grand jury? The OIC's failure to obtain our sworn testimony now allows Ray to smear us - to punish us - by claiming Ms. Hillary, and a former bar bouncer, and a disgraced White House counsel, are credible, and by implication, we are not. …….."

Associated Press 3/19/00 William Mann "…… Independent Counsel Robert Ray said Sunday he is adding investigators to help him determine whether to file criminal charges against President Clinton. It marked the first time that Ray, who took over for Kenneth Starr in October, has publicly discussed the possibility that Clinton might be prosecuted for his statements and actions in the Monica Lewinsky matter. A federal judge in Little Rock, Ark., has held the president in civil contempt for 10 alleged lies in a deposition that ''no reasonable person would seriously dispute.'' ...... ''My basic view is that the commonsense view of the American people is the right view, which is the president has been punished. He has the mark of Cain on his forehead he could never erase,'' Schumer said. ''And that we ought to ... go on to other things.'' ..."

Washington Weekly 3/19/00 Rep. Bob Barr The Honorable Robert Ray Independent Counsel "….
Dear Mr. Ray: I am writing to you about a matter which has, since it was uncovered in June 1996, commonly been referred to as the "Filegate scandal"; involving the illegal acquisition of over 900 FBI files by the Clinton-Gore White House, and the misuse of other government files protected by The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a et. seq., in order to gather information to smear political adversaries and critics. As you may know, I have been subjected to these tactics, in order to prevent me from carrying out my duties as a U.S. Congressman during the impeachment proceedings against President William Jefferson Clinton. As a result, I have brought litigation to redress the harm caused to me and to the Congress, and to obtain the files which The Clinton-Gore White House, and its Justice Department, have been keeping on me. I am therefore a putative plaintiff in the widening Filegate scandal, and an actual plaintiff in my own lawsuit. See Attachment 1.

………I am concerned about recent reports published in the New York Times, and elsewhere, that you have met with certain members of media, such as William Safire, and disclosed to them that your investigation of this scandal has failed to yield the evidence required for criminal prosecution, and will therefore be closed. While I do not believe it proper or correct for the Office of the Independent Counsel ("OIC") to be leaking details of its investigation to the media -- particularly before the subject report on Filegate is made available to the public and Congress -- I am even more disturbed by evidence that the OIC has failed to conduct an adequate investigation. This evidence comes largely from a civil lawsuit prosecuted by Judicial Watch, Inc., on behalf of the class of aggrieved persons, many of whom are Republicans, and includes but is not limited to, a number of perceived defects in your investigation.

……..First, sworn deposition testimony shows that key material witnesses, such as Linda Tripp, Thomas "Mac" McLarty and Terry Good have neither been substantively questioned informally nor called before the grand jury, despite Mr. Starr's representations in his letter of December l1, 1998, to the House Judiciary Committee.

……….Linda Tripp, who testified at deposition to Judicial Watch that she witnessed the misuse of FBI files on Republicans, and overheard conversations between Associate White House Counsel William Kennedy and Marsha Scott, a close confidante of Bill and Hillary Clinton, that confirmed the contents of these files were shared with the Democratic National Committee at the direction of Mrs. Clinton, was never even interviewed by your office about Filegate. The same is true for Mr. McLarty, the President's closest friend and The White House Chief of Staff during the period of Filegate. Terry Good, who, as Director of The White House Office of Records Management, delivered up Privacy Act protected files on Linda Tripp, Kathleen Willey and Monica Lewinsky to The White House Counsel's Office -- some of which material was leaked to the media -- and as someone who stored the overflow of Republican FBI files in his office, should also have been questioned, but was not. Hillary Clinton -- who evidence shows was the mastermind of Filegate -- was questioned informally by Ken Starr for only nine minutes. James Carville was never questioned at all, by Ken Starr's own admission. These are just a few of the many examples of material witnesses who have not been substantively interviewed or called before the grand jury by the OIC.

……..Second, it defies imagination how the OIC could rely on the FBI to investigate its own improper acts in Filegate, rather than using some other, independent law enforcement or investigatory body. By the admission of its current Director, Louis Freeh, the FBI engaged in egregious violations of privacy without justification when it turned over the subject FBI files to The Clinton-Gore White House. It is therefore not difficult to figure out that the agency should not have been charged with investigating itself. This is akin to asking the fox to investigate his own henhouse massacre. Indeed, past experiences concerning Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, and the Olympic bombing, confirm that the agency cannot properly or objectively investigate its own misconduct.

……..Indeed, the FBI's conduct in this matter is also troubling. I am aware that two agents of the FBI visited the home of former FBI Special Agent Dennis Sculimbrene shortly after it was disclosed he had recorded a conversation with former White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum linking Hillary Clinton to the hiring of Craig Livingstone, the former bar bouncer who was encharged, along with Anthony Marceca, with reviewing the subject FBI files. During this visit, former Special Agent Sculimbrene was harassed and intimidated in an attempt to silence or discredit him. Incidentally, Mr. Livingstone's sidekick, Mr. Marceca, invoked the Fifth Amendment nearly 2,000 times when he testified to Judicial Watch -- hardly the conduct of someone who had engaged in an "innocent bureaucratic snafu." For Mr. Marceca's "efforts," his testimony shows that he was rewarded with salary step increases, and never even criticized by the Clinton-Gore Administration for his misconduct.

……..Third, when Judicial Watch deposed William Kennedy, the Associate White House Counsel who not only supervised Livingstone and Marceca, but also reviewed the subject FBI files himself (having by the admission of his former wife, Gail Leslie Kennedy, taken them home and loaded them onto a computer on the kitchen table), he was asked whether he stored the files of Republicans in his office. In response, he literally choked -- as revealed by the videotape of his testimony.

……..Fourth, recent revelations -- based on the sworn testimony of two Clinton-Gore White House whistleblowers -- show that The White House has suppressed over 100,000 and perhaps as many as 1,000,000 e-mails, in addition to about 500 hard drive cartridges, which contain incriminating evidence concerning Filegate, Travelgate, Chinagate, Lewinsky and other Clinton scandals. I understand from Judicial Watch you have refused to meet personally with these witnesses, much like your predecessor, Ken Starr, who never met with Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, and other key persons who had evidence about key aspects of the Clinton-Gore scandals. Notwithstanding this, how can you meet with William Safire of the New York Times, and leak information about the results of the OIC's investigations -- thereby creating a false impression that you have thoroughly investigated Filegate and other matters -- when your office has not reviewed crucial evidence and met with key, material witnesses?

…….Finally, I am aware, from published reports in The Washington Post, that Attorney General Janet Reno had offered to drop her ethics investigation of alleged improprieties in your office, if the OIC closed its investigations. Ms. Reno's offer was based on her professed claim that the Justice Department would no longer have jurisdiction to pursue an ethics investigation if your investigation(s) were closed. See Attachment 2. The timing of your revelations to close the OIC's investigations is therefore quite troubling.

………For all of these reasons -- and this simply scratches the surface -- I am deeply concerned that you and your office have failed to duly execute your duties as Independent Counsel. In addition, as I am personally involved in the Filegate scandal -- it has been reported that The White House obtained my FBI and other government files (See Attachment 3) -- I demand a full explanation, before deciding what further action is necessary. I understand that in addition to me, neither you nor your office have been in contact with other aggrieved parties, prior to your leaking the results of your apparent findings to William Safire, and now forwarding your report on Filegate to the three-judge panel.

……..As a private, aggrieved citizen, and a member of the House Judiciary Committee and Government Reform Committee, I will not rest until justice is done. Clearly, your leaked findings on Filegate and some of the other Clinton-Gore scandals are suspect. ….."

This Week Freeper Kristinn 3/19/00 "….. As transcribed from today's "This Week" on ABC News.
George Will:
"With regard to this, your focus, with senior White House officials--just out of curiousity, what did they do with the files in those months that they sat there ?"
Robert Ray:
"In most instances we were able, uh, to reconstruct, uh, the list that the White House actually used, uh, in order to request files from the FBI. And in instances where those files, and there were many of them, came from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and went to the White House, most of those files, once those, uh, who were responsible for reviewing them realized that they were with regard to people who no longer required access to the White House, they, simply went into the vault at the, at the White House and that's where they remain." ….."

United Press International 3/19/00 "….. Independent Counsel Robert Ray, who succeeded Kenneth Starr, confirmed Sunday that he has added new staff to his office and is evaluating whether to prosecute President Clinton in connection with his actions in the Monica Lewinsky case. Ray, appearing on ABC's "This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts," acknowledged that he has hired two more prosecutors and has plans to add additional agents from the FBI and other federal agencies to complete the probe……… Ray would no go into the substance of the issues he is considering. " But there is a bigger issue here and the bigger issue is that no person, including the President of the United States, is above the law," he said……."

New York Times 3/20/00 Akhil Reed Amar "…… Just when you thought it was over, think again. Robert W. Ray, the independent counsel who succeeded Kenneth Starr, is considering indicting Bill Clinton after he leaves the White House and said yesterday he is expanding his legal and investigative staff. Many commentators have come out against any such prosecution because, they say, the charges against President Clinton were fully adjudicated in his impeachment trial. There are indeed good reasons not to prosecute Mr. Clinton, but an acquittal in an impeachment trial is not one of them. Mr. Clinton's impeachment focused on whether he was fit to complete his term of office. The question in a criminal case is whether he committed a crime of any sort, however small. These two questions overlap but are plainly distinct. The Constitution makes clear that an official who is tried by the Senate may nevertheless be subject to "indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment" in an ordinary criminal court. …..This principle makes consummate sense. If presidents received get-out-of-jail-free cards when impeachments failed, senators might be tempted to convict simply to ensure that the wrongdoer did not escape justice altogether. ….."

Judicial Watch 3/20/00 "…….Today, Judicial Watch filed a complaint, under the Freedom of Information Act, to obtain documentation from the Office of Independent Counsel concerning his so-called "investigation" of the Filegate scandal. A copy of the complaint is at www.JudicialWatch.org . In recent days, Robert Ray, the Democrat successor and former deputy to Ken Starr, leaked and then forwarded a report on Filegate, before his office even bothered to interview key witnesses, such as Linda Tripp, who testified to Judicial Watch and the Court to having observed FBI files being loaded onto Clinton-Gore White House computers, at the direction of Hillary Clinton. Further, Ray issued the Filegate Report, despite recent revelations from White House whistleblowers that as much as 1,000,000 e-mail [and 457 hard drive cartridges] -- containing incriminating information about Filegate and other Clinton-Gore scandals -- were suppressed by the Clinton-Gore White House. Further, officials in the Clinton-Gore White House threatened the whistleblowers and others not to reveal this, or they would be sent to jail. Such actions constitute obstruction of justice.

………Yesterday, Ray appeared on ABC's "This Week" and, under questioning from Sam Donaldson, effectively admitted that he did not interview key witnesses, or meet with the whistleblowers (much more conduct a full investigation), before leaking and then issuing his Filegate Report. Ray, a converted Democrat, who registered as an Independent after becoming Independent Counsel, could offer no excuse for his dereliction of duty. However, The Washington Post may have an explanation. In an article written by Roberto Suro, entitled "Justice Dept. Puts Starr Investigation on Hold, Sources Say," of June 6, 1999, he reports that Attorney General Janet Reno offered to not undertake a criminal ethics investigation of alleged leaks in the Office of Independent Counsel, if he closed his investigations.

……….Ray closed his Filegate investigation and issued a press release that could have been, and probably was, written in conjunction with the Clinton-Gore Administration -- exonerating the Clintons and effusively praising their cooperation. Just tell that to the e-mail whistleblowers, who were threatened with jail if they talked. And tell that to the Court in Judicial Watch's class action Filegate civil suit -- which has been lied to and seen evidence destroyed repeatedly by the Clinton-Gore Administration in a number of cases, involving the Health Care Task Force, Indian trust fund, Chinagate and Filegate.

Judicial Watch 3/17/00 "…..Yesterday's forwarding of a Report purportedly exonerating the Clintons and others in the Filegate scandal, by the Independent Counsel, raises more questions than it claims to answer. First, why would Robert Ray leak the "results" of the Report, and then issue a press release praising the "substantial cooperation and assistance of The White House" when in fact the opposite has been true? For example, it was recently revealed by whistleblowers who worked in The White House that between 100,000 and 1-million e-mails, containing incriminating evidence about Filegate, and other Clinton-Gore scandals, have been suppressed. Further, these whistleblowers disclosed that the Clinton-Gore White House threatened to "jail" anyone who spoke about the suppression of evidence. In the course of this burgeoning scandal, it was later revealed that about 500 hard disk drive cartridges, containing key documents, were never searched in response to Judicial Watch, Congressional, and Independent Counsel subpoenas. "Despite offers by Judicial Watch to have these whistleblowers (who are clients) meet personally with Mr. Ray, he refused. This is in contrast with Chairman Dan Burton of the House Government Reform Committee, who found the time to personally investigate the facts," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.......... "The only logical explanation for Ray leaking and then sending his Report to the three judge panel, before the independent counsel's investigation is complete, is that he cut a deal with the Clinton-Gore Administration. In an article (enclosed) entitled "Justice Dept. Puts Starr Investigation on Hold, Sources Say," which appeared in The Washington Post on June 6, 1999, Roberto Suro suggests that Attorney General Janet Reno offered to not conduct an ethics investigation of alleged improprieties in the Independent Counsel's office, if its investigations were shut down, as Justice would then lack jurisdiction. It is likely that this explains Mr. Ray's bizarre conduct. As a result, Mr. Ray and his staff should now be investigated," Klayman added.

NewsMax.com 3/16/00 Carl Limbacher "…… After closing out Filegate with no indictments on Thursday, the Office of the Independent Counsel admitted that it did not pursue the central issue in the FBI files scandal -- the White House's illegal acquisition of over a thousand confidential background files on Republicans who worked for past administrations. The Office did not investigate alleged violations of the Privacy Act of 1974," Independent Counsel Robert Ray said in a press release issued Thursday afternoon, "because such offenses are excluded from the jurisdiction of an independent counsel." ………… "I'm sure that Mr. Ray feels that he's on firm legal ground," Landmark Legal Foundation's Mark Levin told NewsMax.com, "but I'm not aware that he's affirmatively barred from looking into the Privacy Act. Obviously he was free to seek the Attorney General's permission and if she rejects it, the court's permission to examine Privacy Act violations." "I don't think any examination of Filegate could be complete without that," Levin concluded. ….."

Washington Post 3/28/00 Richard Cohen "......But to no avail. Some pretty keen journalists--and I love 'em all--somehow knew for a fact the White House was dissembling. William Safire called the White House's account "a cover story." George Will mocked it. And Peggy Noonan, writing in the Journal, predicted the New York press would never hold Mrs. Clinton accountable for "FBI files illegally gotten by the former barroom bouncer she hired." In her new book, "The Case Against Hillary Clinton," she repeats the allegation. Yet, back when the files were discovered, a non-White House source told me it seemed the Clintons were telling the truth. "A mere mistake is the most likely explanation," I wrote--not that it mattered any. No one much paid attention, and those who did suggested I had been duped. I am not arguing for a clear exoneration of the Clintons on each and every accusation brought against them. The independent counsel has yet to announce whether he will seek indictments relating to Travelgate, Whitewater or President Clinton's ridiculous (if not illegal) assertion that he did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky. (What was it, Parcheesi?) The firings at the White House travel office remain troubling. They may not have been illegal, but the use of the FBI was surely excessive. And, just for the record, I never liked the easy money Hillary made in futures trading, either......."

L J World 4/5/00 "……. Ignorance of the federal system and reformer's passion led to creation of the ill-fated special prosecutor's position, Kenneth Starr says. By Erwin Seba Journal-World Writer Former Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr spoke out against constitutional illiteracy in an address Tuesday night at the Lied Center. "The lack of understanding about our constitutional system is disturbing," Starr said in delivering the Kansas University School of Business' Vickers Lecture. Starr said such illiteracy, and a passion for reform after the Watergate scandal, led to ill-guided measures like the special prosecutor law that brought him to fame investigating the scandals of the Clinton White ..."

National Journal Group Inc. 4/18/00 Stuart Taylor Jr. "……"President Clinton is not 'above the law.' His conduct should not be excused, nor will it. The President can be criminally prosecuted, especially once he leaves office. In other words, his acts may not be 'removable' wrongs, but they could be 'convictable' crimes." --Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., in arguing last year that President Clinton should not be removed from office. Independent Counsel Robert W. Ray is a serious man with much to be serious about. Soon after Jan. 20, 2001, when President Clinton leaves office, Ray will have to decide whether to seek the first criminal indictment ever of a former President. ……… "There is a principle to be vindicated, and that principle is that no person is above the law, even the President of the United States," Ray told The Washington Post on April 10. That sounds pretty serious. ……… Ray has emphasized that even if crimes have been committed, he must decide whether "it is appropriate to bring a case" as a matter of prosecutorial discretion. A key factor in that calculus is whether he could win. ………… But while the stunningly shameless Clinton may deserve an indictment, Ray should not seek one. The most obvious reason is the extreme unlikelihood that Ray could persuade 12 jurors to convict -- especially jurors in Washington, D.C., where Clinton remained immensely popular even as Starr and others were laying out the evidence of his crimes for all to see. (Any effort to indict Clinton in Arkansas would be blatant jury shopping and almost as futile.) This is not to impugn D.C. jurors….. Prosecutors are not supposed to bring cases they know they will probably lose. And an indictment ending in acquittal would only lend unwarranted credibility to Clinton's campaign to delegitimize his impeachment. More fundamentally, a prosecution that could possibly lead to imprisonment of any former President -- unless for crimes more grave than those of Clinton -- would set a disturbing precedent, and could polarize and traumatize the nation even more than impeachment did. It's true that nobody should be above the law. That's why I saw impeachment as a painful but healthy effort to purge the nation of a President who had debased his office. But most of the nation and 50 Senators disagreed. The rule of law is not a fetish. Even House Judiciary Chairman Henry J. Hyde, R-Ill., who had led the crusade for impeachment under the "rule of law" banner, said after the Senate vote that Clinton had not gone unpunished and should not be indicted. It's over……"

Telegraph/UK 4/16/00 James Langton "…….. The man who quietly took over as independent counsel last October might yet inflict legal and political damage on the President and Mrs Clinton. In interviews in Washington last week, Mr Ray, 39, revealed that he has recently hired six new lawyers to investigate criminal wrongdoing by President Clinton and plans to spend more than $6 million probing the White House before the year is out. By then, the President will be only weeks from the end of his term of office. Speculation is growing that the independent counsel's office expects to bring charges of perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements in relation to his sexual relationship with the White House trainee Monica Lewinsky and attempts to conceal the affair. Mr Ray insists that the matter is still "an open investigation" and that "there is a principle to be vindicated, that no person is above the law, even the President of the United States". The independent counsel's report is likely to hit when Mr Clinton is about to become a private citizen for the first time in eight years and stripped of the immunity of his office. Rather than the politicised impeachment hearings in the Senate nearly two years ago, Mr Clinton may face a grand jury hearing and a possible criminal trial for perjury and obstruction of justice. ........."

The New York Times 4/17/00 Gary McDowell "…….You argue that indicting President Clinton after he leaves office for "offenses adjudicated in the context of impeachment that received an adequate and punishing airing in the Senate trial" would be "a disservice to the Constitution" (editorial, April 13). But impeachment is not a legal but a political process. The founders understood the importance of keeping those two things separate. Indeed, the Constitution reads that any person impeached would still be "liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law." If Robert Ray, the independent counsel, allows the vote in the Senate to trump the legal process, it would be nothing less than a dereliction of duty. ……"

Washington Post 4/12/00 "…… INDEPENDENT counsel Robert Ray, who took over for Kenneth Starr last year, has been publicly flirting with the idea of indicting President Clinton when he leaves office. The notion isn't as easily dismissed as Mr. Clinton's defenders contend. Mr. Clinton, after all, lied in a deposition and before a federal grand jury. A plausible indictment of Mr. Clinton, who has never publicly acknowledged the extent of his wrongdoing, could surely be drawn. Moreover, some opponents of impeachment argued during the congressional proceedings that Mr. Clinton's susceptibility to criminal prosecution after his term in office was a powerful reason not to remove him. It would be a bit of a bait-and-switch for those who advanced this line to argue now that prosecution is improper. ……"

The New York Times 4/13/00 "…… There are worrying signs that Robert Ray, the career prosecutor who succeeded Kenneth Starr as independent counsel investigating President Clinton, shares his clumsy predecessor's problem in winding up an investigation. Mr. Ray at this point should have a concise two-point agenda -- to deliver a report summing up the findings of his office, and then go home. Instead he is beefing up his staff. Moreover, he makes it no secret that he is actively considering indicting Mr. Clinton after he leaves office in connection with the same issues that were argued at the impeachment trial last year. In other words, Mr. Ray intends to drag out his mandate nine more months. "It is an open investigation," he told The Washington Post this week. "There is a principle to be vindicated, and that principle is that no person is above the law, even the president of the United States." Mr. Ray is right about that principle, and we have consistently favored vigorous inquiries into the president's personal and campaign finances and his truthfulness under oath. But respect for the rule of law does not require a suspension of reasonable prosecutorial discretion. ……"

CBSNEWS.com 4/13/00 "……President Clinton says he has "no interest" in receiving a pardon if he faces charges after leaving office, CBS News Correspondent Peter Maer reports. In a terse response to a question, the president told a newspaper editors' convention Thursday "this Whitewater thing was a lie and a fraud from the beginning." "I don't have any interest in that," Mr. Clinton told the American Society of Newspaper Editors. "I don't want one and I am prepared to stand before any bar of justice I have to stand before." He also said, "I'm glad I didn't quit" when faced with impeachment by the House and removal by the Senate a battle he won after a historic trial that concluded last year. ……."

AP/Las Vegas Sun 4/13/00 "......A Democratic senator said Thursday it is "the brink of lunacy" for Independent Counsel Robert Ray to consider indicting President Clinton after he leaves office. "What is happening here is too outlandish and unbelievable to qualify anymore as literature," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said on the Senate floor. ...... During the Lewinsky scandal, Reid co-sponsored a censure resolution that, in lieu of impeachment proceedings, would have provided for the president to remain subject to criminal actions in a court of law. Reid said that Clinton is being subjected to both impeachment proceedings and criminal indictment is tantamount to double jeopardy......."

Freeper Starfan "......Co-sponsors of the Resolution of Censure: Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Smith of Oregon, Mr. Daschle, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Reid, Mr. Gorton, Mr. Bryan, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Torricelli, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Wyden, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Kerrey, Mr.Schumer, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Breaux, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Reed, Ms. Landrieu,Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Levin, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Robb, Mr. Inouye, and Mr. Akaka.

Resolution of Censure

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a subordinate employee in the White House, which was shameful,reckless and indefensible;

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, deliberately misled and deceived the American people, and people in all branches of the United States government;

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, gave false or misleading testimony and his actions have had the effect of impeding discovery of evidence in judicial proceedings;

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton's conduct in this matter is unacceptable for a President of the United States, does demean the Office of the President as well as the President himself, and creates disrespect for the laws of the land;

Whereas President Clinton fully deserves censure for engaging in such behavior;

Whereas future generations of Americans must know that such behavior is not only unacceptable but also bears grave consequences, including loss of integrity, trust and respect;

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton remains subject to criminal actions in a court of law like any other citizen;

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton's conduct in this matter has brought shame and dishonor to himself and to the Office of the President; and

Whereas William Jefferson Clinton through his conduct in this matter has violated the trust of the American people:

Now therefore, be it Resolved, That the United States Senate does hereby censure William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, and does condemn his wrongful conduct in the strongest terms; and now be it

Further resolved, That the United States Senate recognizes the historic gravity of this bipartisan resolution, and trusts and urges that future congresses will recognize the importance of allowing this bipartisan statement of censure and condemnation to remain intact for all time; and be it

Further resolved, That the Senate now move on to other matters of significance to our people, to reconcile differences between and within the branches of government, and to work together--across party lines--for the benefit of the American people. ......"

Senate Floor Statement by Senator Harry Reid Regarding the Ongoing Investigation of President Clinton by the Independent Counsel April 13, 2000 .......The House of Representatives voted to impeach on a straight party-line vote. This body voted not to convict the President on any charge. We then decided not to renew the law that authorized the Independent Counsel. That law died last summer.......... Mr. President, this is a long, sad and sordid story that should have ended long ago. The Independent Counsel's office has repeatedly stepped over the line of decency in its quest to find something, anything, on the President of the United States. Now, the new Special Prosecutor says he is looking at indicting the President after he leaves office next year. I say enough is enough. ......... The President has been tried in this body and acquitted. He has suffered, his family has suffered. His legacy is forever tarnished. He is deeply in debt to his lawyers. The Arkansas bar is considering withdrawing his license to practice law. He has not gone unpunished. Apparently, that is not enough for Mr. Ray. ........Many of his critics like to point out that the President does not have greater rights under the law than any other citizen of this country. That is true. But it is equally true that the President should not have fewer rights than any other citizen. ......... What the President did should not be lightly or easily forgiven. But it should not be blown out of proportion either, by an unrelenting prosecutor with an unlimited budget in search of a conviction that won't serve the cause of justice. This case has gone on far too long. Enough is enough. ......."

SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE 4/5/00 Thomas Hargrove "…….Clinton's trip late last month to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Switzerland was the most expensive and, critics charge, the least productive foreign trip ever taken by a U.S. chief executive. _... White House on Monday reported the Air Force has estimated that Mr. Clinton's travels to the Asian subcontinent will cost between $50 million and $75 million, although precise figures will not be available for months. ..."

Washington Post 3/31/00 Lorraine Adams "……Former independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr spent more than $52 million investigating President Clinton, officially making his Whitewater and Monica S. Lewinsky probe the most costly independent counsel investigation ever, according to a General Accounting Office report released yesterday...."

Associated Press 4/3/00 "…….- Independent Counsel Robert Ray announced Monday he is hiring two federal prosecutors from Tampa, Fla., in the investigation of President Clinton and the first lady. Joining Ray's office are Latour Lafferty, an assistant U.S. attorney who has handled organized crime cases, and Monte Richardson, who prosecuted complex fraud cases before becoming executive assistant U.S. attorney for special projects community-related programs in the federal prosecutor's office in Tampa.. .."

Weekly Standard 5/8/00 Stephan Bates Starr Deputy "….. If William Jefferson Clinton's advice in 1991 to Gennifer Flowers was "deny, deny, deny," the administration's approach in 1998 to Kenneth Starr's office, where I worked as an associate independent counsel, was "delay, delay, delay." Now, in Truth at Any Cost, Susan Schmidt of the Washington Post and Michael Weiss kopf of Time provide a comprehensive, fine-grained, and occasionally infuriating account of what we were up against. Clinton's lawyers, the government ones and the private ones alike, withheld everything they could. Even before the Lewinsky investigation, the authors note, our subpoenas met with what deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes approvingly called a "foot-dragging, f-k-you attitude." "If they want it," said David Kendall, Bill and Hillary Clinton's private lawyer, "they can litigate for it." We did litigate, and we mostly won, but the court fights consumed time and resourcesógiving Clinton defenders a foothold for complaining that the investigation was too lengthy and too costly. ..."

4/30/00 DAVID McKAY WILSON THE JOURNAL NEWS "……. First lady Hillary Rodham Clinton has found financial support for her Senate bid in a most unlikely place, the law firm of former White House independent counsel Kenneth Starr. Clinton's campaign received $32,250 in donations from the political action committee for the Kirkland & Ellis law firm during the first three months of 2000, recent campaign-finance filings show. The money came from 33 attorneys and one legal assistant at the firm. No one from Kirkland & Ellis has contributed to New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's Senate campaign during the same period, records show….. A recent report in The New Yorker magazine noted that law partners were split over whether Starr should be allowed to return to the firm's Washington office. The report found that the firm was broken into three camps: those who didn't want him, those who wanted his return, and those who would allow him back, but with a cut in pay from an estimated $2 million a year to about $800,000 a year……"

Drudgereport 4/23/00 "……Former Independent Counsel Ken Starr directed his aides to draft a sample indictment of President Bill Clinton, a new book set for release this week will claim. And last October, Starr's staff began practicing arguments to make their case! ……… WASHINGTON POST'S Schmidt and TIME magazine's Weisskopf reveal in "Truth at Any Cost: Ken Starr and the Unmasking of Bill Clinton" that Starr, at one point, came within hours of losing his job and being declared in contempt of court during the Lewinsky mess because he refused to obey a secret court order to answer questions by Clinton lawyers about grand jury leaks. ……… TIME magazine -- in fresh editions hitting racks on Monday -- pulls details from the book: *Private investigators, a customary tool of Clinton backers seeking to discourage his enemies, appeared in Starr's hometown, sniffing after the political connections of the prosecutor's dead father. *A White House contact told a reporter that Starr -- often cartooned as a hymn-singing Fundamentalist -- was himself having an affair. *Clinton friend James Carville collected tapes of phone calls made to his office discussing the sexual backgrounds of Starr's staff. …….."

Insight Magazine 4/24/00 Paul Rodriguez "……As Independent Counsel Robert Ray issues at least one subpoena involving the "lost" White House emails, Insight is told there could be previously unknown private emails involving President Bill Clinton. Insight has also learned that Ray is preparing other subpoenas (at least one has been issued) to potential witnesses with direct knowledge of the overall emails issue, including outside contractors and former White House employees. Moreover, separate subpoenas are in the works involving previously unknown long distance telephone records that have never been turned over to any investigating body.. ….When Insight first broke the emails and telephone billing records stories, the White House said it would turn them over to investigators. But in the intervening months since this did not happen. And in the flury of activity involving the impeachment of Clinton, the existence of the records was shoved to the sidelines and out of the public' eye. ……. Now, with witnesses willing to step forward and discuss the matters, Congress and federal probers are on the hunt again….."

Insight Magazine 4/24/00 Paul Rodriguez "…… That said, however, despite failure to secure the so-called lost emails and once "missing" telephone records, Ray has begun to close down various portions of his multi-pronged investigation of Clinton and others caught up in several White House scandals. …… Officials with his OIC office have said privately, including to several members of Congress, that even though such materials have not been obtained -- let alone known about -- Ray is confident he has obtained everything he needs to reasonably conclude some probes, such as Filegate. This has puzzled a number of investigators on Capitol Hill, as well as some working within Ray's own office. The existence of the emails and telephone records could provide substantial new leads to federal investigators, not to mention providing evidence to determine whether individuals have lied -- or told the truth…….. The Campaign Task Force interviewed both Clinton and Gore recently for several hours about alleged wrongdoing involving the 1996 election but, reportedly, neither the president nor vice president are targets of federal agents. A target is a person that has been notified he or she is the subject of a specific criminal investigation. ……"

Insight Magazine 4/24/00 Paul Rodriguez "……Among such materials, are private telephone billing statements on special "outside" lines with a 6-3-8 exchange that could have been used by the president, given that several such phones are located in the residence. These phone lines, including a handful installed for the DNC, or Democratic National Committee, in the Old Executive Office Building were previously unknown to federal or congressional investigators until Insight revealed their existence recently. "We don't have such records," says one federal official. "We were told they did not exist and that includes the long-distance records you've reported on." Said a second federal official: "It's another surprise. What else have you got? What else don't we know about?" ………. "

Washington Post 4/25/00 Deb Riechmann AP "…..Independent Counsel Robert Ray has issued a grand jury subpoena to the National Archives to determine whether White House officials tried to obstruct investigations ranging from Whitewater to Monica Lewinsky by not turning over e-mail, officials said. The move injects Ray into the latest Clinton administration controversy when his office is trying to wrap up a six-year investigation and decide whether the president should be indicted when he leaves office……… The independent counsel's office also is conducting interviews of witnesses in the e-mail controversy jointly with the Justice Department's campaign fund-raising task force, government officials told The Associated Press today. Both investigative agencies are trying to determine why the White House failed to review thousands of e-mails to see if they were responsive to subpoenas issued in various Clinton-administration investigations, the officials said.......Under the Presidential Records Act of 1978, the National Archives advises White House employees about managing presidential records but does not take full custody of such records until a president leaves office……….. "

UPI 4/24/00 "………In the wake of lengthy testimony by President Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, the National Archives is confirming it has been subpoenaed by independent counsel Robert Ray for information on White House record-keeping. Officials said the demand is likely related to thousands of missing e-mail messages from the White House, possibly related to the Monica Lewinsky affair and campaign fund-raising practices. It remained unclear Monday night whether Ray had officially expanded his investigation, by seeking permission from the three-judge panel that oversees him. Spokesmen for his office were not immediately available for comment. A White House spokesman, Jim Kennedy, said, "As far as I know, that did not occur." .........Kennedy also said he did not know of any other subpoenas that had been issued by Ray, who must decide whether the president should be indicted when he leaves office.......:

UPI 4/24/00 "………Ray's office issued a subpoena last Tuesday to the National Archives and Records Administration, the government's official custodian of documents. Spokeswoman Susan Cooper said said it was "relating to record-keeping practices in the executive office of the president" and it would be complied with. Officials said the independent counsel's office has been conducting interviews of witnesses in the e-mail controversy, though Kennedy wouldn't say whether Clinton or Gore were questioned on that aspect specifically during more than three hours of testimony each last week. Clinton was interviewed at the White House for four hours; Gore said he was interviewed last Tuesday. The Justice Department's campaign fund-raising task force interviewed both men in its long-running investigation into alleged campaign-fund-raising abuses in the Democrats 1996 re-election campaign. ......... " Remark by Ol’Dan Tucker "……’Now, the leak from last week was that Clinton and Gore were not targets. Why the leak, and did it also cover possible questions on e-mails? There's more in those e-mails than stuff about illegal donations, I'll bet.’ …. I'd bet you're right, too. A million-plus emails can cover a lot of ground. If Gore was making campaign calls from his WH desk, you can bet he was emailing and faxing using WH facilities as well. And he's just one guy. They probably had the basement packed full of worker drones. ……..Then there's all the commerce deals with the satellite, supercomputer and missile guidance technology companies looking to get trade approvals with China, all of Clinton's Wag the Dog's, intimidation of all those witnesses and accusers, like Tripp, Jones, Flowers, Broaddrick, etc. The possibilities are endless……… How come neither Clinton nor Gore fought this questioning under oath all the way to the Supreme Court like they did with the Lewinsky questioning? I'm sure the only reason this is even being mentioned in the media is so that Gore can say in November that, of course, the DOIj looked into the matter back in April, blah, blah, blah. Of course Clinton and Gore aren't the target of the investigation. They're the targets of the cover-ups. The targets of the investigations are those who are witnesses to the White House lawbreaking and spoke out against it, like Haas and Lambuth. That's who Reno and the FBI are going after --the innocents. There's a lot of people to buy off, intimidate or Arkincide between now and November. </sarcasm> ….."

Drudge Report 4/23/00 "…….TIME magazine -- in fresh editions hitting racks on Monday -- pulls details from the book:
*Private investigators, a customary tool of Clinton backers seeking to discourage his enemies, appeared in Starr's hometown, sniffing after the political connections of the prosecutor's dead father.
*A White House contact told a reporter that Starr -- often cartooned as a hymn-singing Fundamentalist -- was himself having an affair.
*Clinton friend James Carville collected tapes of phone calls made to his office discussing the sexual backgrounds of Starr's staff.
Carville's tapes are now under seal in another lawsuit, and the Ragin' Cajun denies circulating the material. The new info may help support claims made by Doug Ireland in the NATION magazine. Ireland reported that another Clinton friend, Sidney Blumenthal, the famed White House media counselor, spread derogatory sex stories about members of Starr's staff. "Three members of the media confirmed to me that Sidney Blumenthal had indeed been spreading such stories," reported Ireland. "...Blumenthal had told them directly of the same-sex orientation of a member of Starr's staff." Blumenthal called the report a "complete lie." ….."

Drudge Report 4/23/00 "…….Schmidt/Weisskopf book impacting on Tuesday. "'Truth at Any Cost' offers a detailed inside account of Starr's investigation from the vicinity of the office water cooler. The authors had 10 lengthy interviews with Starr and long talks with 25 assistants," the WASHINGTON POST reported on Sunday.
"Starr's staff gathered to discuss indictment in October 1999. 'No one doubted the strength of their evidence, at least in a perjury case,' the authors write. 'The question before them was a matter of prosecutorial discretion.... Some at the summit meeting argued that Clinton had suffered enough."
Starr ultimately decided that he'd let his successor, Robert Ray, make the final choice whether or not to indict.
The book also reveals that most every lawyer in the OIC believed that Hillary Clinton had lied in sworn testimony over her Whitewater dealings but they did not have enough evidence to indict......."

townhall.com 5/5/00 Mona Charen "…… The next sound you hear will be conservatives cocking their heads as if suffering from swimmer's ear. You mean two reporters from the liberal-leaning Washington Post have written a book vindicating Kenneth Starr? They have. Susan Schmidt and Michael Weisskopf (now at Time) offer the first of what will doubtless be scores of post-Clinton histories. This one gives Kenneth Starr his due. "Truth at Any Cost" is not a brief for the much-maligned independent counsel, but it is surprisingly sympathetic, and about the right things. This book not only refutes the manifold lies spread by the Clinton forces about Ken Starr -- it goes further and presents the battle between these two men in essentially moral terms. ……"

Free Daily/American Spectator 5/5/00 Emmett Tyrrell Jr "…….The good news this week is that Susan Schmidt and Michael Weisskopf's book, Truth at Any Cost: Ken Starr and the Unmaking of Bill Clinton, has just arrived in bookstores. ……… A disciplined account of Ken Starr's investigation of Whitewater and all the attendant Clinton scandals that followed, Truth at Any Cost sees the Independent Counsel's investigation of President Clinton as it is. It is not, as Clinton diehards spin it, a "coup d'état" or a "conspiracy." Such hyperbolic squawks are examples of what the eminent American historian Richard Hofstadter termed "the paranoid style in American politics." ……. Rather, Starr's work has been the orderly procedures of a duly constituted prosecutor pursing the irregularities of a politician who clearly and repeatedly has lied under oath and obstructed justice. There is nothing particularly unusual or villainous here. Politicians lie all the time. Some -- the most reckless -- lie under oath. To those of us who see the world as it is, Clinton is what he has been since we began viewing him sometime around 1991, to wit, a rogue who puts himself above the law. He is, as a now famous judge described him after seeing him as he is even under oath. ……"

Washington Post 5/8/00 Benjamin Wittes "……. When independent counsel Robert Ray announced recently that he would consider the question of whether to indict President Clinton after the president's term of office ends, the cry arose that another fanatical menace had been hatched by the independent counsel law. For those of us who believe that any prosecution of the president would be folly, this is an awkward moment to come to Ray's defense. ……… Starr was neither the politically motivated crusader nor the unethical zealot his shriller critics have described. But he did see the independent counsel law as authorizing a grand search for the truth about its targets. Starr is candid that he saw himself less as a traditional prosecutor than as a kind of truth commissioner (though he doesn't like that term). His insistence that truth was the statute's paramount demand led him to conduct his investigation differently from the way someone thinking like a traditional prosecutor would have. Where the traditional prosecutor might have said, "Enough's enough," Starr's view compelled him to keep asking questions.......Ray, by contrast, appears to see his role as narrowly prosecutorial. While he does not criticize Starr's reading of the statute, his view of it seems quite different: He is no truth commissioner. "There is a view of the independent counsel law that is kind of the report[ing] view: Shine a spotlight and gather the facts," he said in a recent interview. "I am not going to shine a spotlight unless it is going to bring me facts with which I can bring a case. . . . I am not a congressional committee, nor am I a newspaper. I am a prosecutor. I turn a spotlight on to see if there are crimes to prosecute……"

WorldNetDaily 5/3/00 David Bresnahan "…..Former Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr would not confirm or deny plans to indict the president or the first lady on criminal charges when Clinton's presidency ends -- but there was a smile on his face when he said he couldn't comment. Starr was helping to raise money to disbar President Clinton Saturday night, and he granted an exclusive interview with WorldNetDaily to reflect on his experience while investigating the president. ……Starr said it was nearly impossible to conduct an investigation effectively when the Clinton administration attacked him every day. He said he was understaffed and had no one to perform public relations that could respond to the spin team at the White House. ……. Clinton had an "army" of public relations people, said Starr, while he had no one. He said members of Congress constantly complained that they would send him letters and he never answered. His office did not have enough staff to handle correspondence, and no one to deal with public relations. …."

WorldNetDaily 5/3/00 David Bresnahan "….."We carried on. I'm not whining," explained Starr. "We carried on and we were able to do our work effectively and successfully in courts until the results of impeachment were in." He claims his effectiveness ended when "we saw the jury pool in Arkansas and the eastern district in Virginia polluted by the residue of the very hard feelings that impeachment understandably had left. But until that time, we did conduct ourselves with no small degree of success against some very heavy odds, including the conviction of a sitting governor of the state of Arkansas, who conventional wisdom was could never be convicted in the state of Arkansas." Starr says he has no regrets, and he would not have done anything differently. He does not think he was too detached from the process, nor does he agree with critics who say he was not sufficiently aggressive. …….."I think we did what we were obligated to do, which was to provide the information to Congress, along with an analysis of it. And then it was entirely in the hands of the political system, which was the way the founding generation meant for it to be," Starr said. "There was nothing, I think, substantially in terms of the conduct of the investigation, that we could have done differently from a practical matter. We determined to be fair. For that, I do not apologize. We determined to be complete in the referral. We don't apologize for that," he said. ….."

Newsday.com 6/5/00 Laurie Asseo "…..The Supreme Court today handed presidential friend Webster Hubbell a victory that wipes out his guilty plea to a misdemeanor tax charge. The justices' 8-1 ruling said prosecutors could not use financial documents against Hubbell that he was forced to produce under a limited grant of immunity. Using the documents would violate his protection against self-incrimination under the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, the justices said. Hubbell pleaded guilty to the tax charge last year on condition his plea would be dismissed if the Supreme Court ruled in his favor on whether the documents could be used. Today, the nation's highest court ordered the charge against him dismissed. ......"

The Nation Magazine 3/30/98 Doug Ireland "…..The first indication that the Clinton White House might be violating the Frank rule came in late February, when MSNBC reported that Clinton loyalists had been leaking derogatory rumors about members of independent counsel Kenneth Starr's staff, including matters of "sexual preference" …….. As both a journalist and as someone who's gay, my interest was sparked, and I began making calls to determine whether the outing accusations were true. Three members of the media confirmed to me that Sidney Blumenthal, the White House media counselor, had indeed been spreading such stories: They'd heard him do it. These reputable members of the Beltway media agreed to tell me what they knew only if guaranteed complete anonymity; they were afraid of losing access to White House sources, and of possible reprisals. Two said that Blumenthal had told them directly of the same-sex orientation of a member of Starr's staff, and a third said he had been present for a conversation in which Blumenthal made such a comment to a third person……..The claims about Blumenthal's activities go beyond Starr's office. On the February 25 Nightline, ABC's Chris Bury reported that Blumenthal "is not only suspected [of] leaking damaging material about Starr's staff, sources tell Nightline he has been disparaging aggressive reporters on the Lewinsky story to their colleagues in the media." Two of the members of the media I spoke to about the Starr allegations also said Blumenthal had described at least two other media figures to them as gay. One of those sources, as well as other people who know Blumenthal, described him as fascinated by sexual gossip that they said he recycles as part of his defense of the Clintons. ……"

The Weekly Standard 6/5/00 "…..A federal judge demolished practically every complaint or allegation Carville and Co. ever made against Kenneth Starr and the Office of Independent Counsel. Dismissing three well-coordinated nuisance suits against Starr -- filed by convicted Whitewater defendant Stephen Smith, indicted Kathleen Willey witness Julie Hiatt Steele, and Francis T. Mandanici, an apparently obsessed, Starr-hating Connecticut lawyer -- district judge John F. Nangle used unusually brutal language. …… The charge that Starr pressured Steele and Susan McDougal to lie and falsely implicate the president? "There's not one shred of support [for that claim] in the hundreds of pages of documents submitted" to him, Judge Nangle wrote. …… The contention that Starr violated the independent counsel statute by testifying before the House Judiciary Committee impeachment inquiry? "Ridiculous." …..The allegation that Starr abused his power by continuing to represent tobacco companies during his supervision of the Whitewater investigation? "Nonsense...absolutely ridiculous." ……The argument that some conflict of interest tainted Starr's aborted acceptance of a deanship at Pepperdine University? "Very dubious." And "the stuff that dreams are made of." ......And "this Court has never heard a more absurd argument." And it is "totally illogical" and there is "no evidence" to substantiate it. ...... Nangle called Stephen Smith's complaints that he had been asked to lie by Starr "meritless" and "completely frivolous." And then Nangle announced that he was considering holding Mandanici in contempt of court. ......"

newsmax.com 6/5/00 UPI "…..The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 Monday that the latest indictment against former Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell must be dismissed because it was based on documents Hubbell was compelled to produce under immunity. Hubbell had pleaded guilty to a reduced tax charge based on the indictment. The decision is a stinging defeat for former independent counsel Kenneth Starr, who prosecuted Hubbell, and for Starr's sucessor, Robert Ray. It is also a major defeat for the Justice Department, which had supported Starr on the ability of prosecutors to use a broad range of weapons when they pursue the target of a grand jury. ……"

AP 6/16/00 "…….Independent Counsel Robert Ray won't prosecute anyone in the White House travel office controversy, and is putting the finishing touches on a report likely to be made public before Hillary Rodham Clinton's Senate campaign ends, officials say. Some documents and testimony gathered by Ray's office and already on the public record suggest Mrs. Clinton played a central role in instigating the firing of seven longtime employees in the White House travel office shortly after President Clinton took office. ……"

Judicial Watch 6/16/00"….. The news today that Independent Counsel Robert Ray will not indict Hillary Clinton and others in the Travelgate scandal comes as no surprise. Ray, a lifelong Democrat with political aspirations (according to a "New York Times profile on March 25, 2000), previously issued a fraudulent Filegate report, and was later forced to admit on ABC's "This Week" that he had neither interviewed key witnesses nor did he obtain the e-mails relative to the e-mail scandal. Judicial Watch believes that Ray is a "Trojan horse" for his Democratic friends on Capitol Hill, who throughout the impeachment proceedings held out false hope that Bill Clinton would be indicted after he left office to deflect impeachment charges and prevent conviction. Ray's obviously disingenuous recent leaks - which arguably were not proper - that he is considering indicting the President after he leaves office, serve the Democrat purposes; to keep the "legal monkey" off the President's and Vice President's back until after the 2000 election season……..While Judicial Watch has had contact with members of Ray's staff - some of whom are quite competent, diligent and honest people - it appears that he keeps them muzzled and under control. "If these staffers were allowed to do their jobs, the situation might be different. However, Ray is playing politics and, indeed, has yet to show his face to Judicial Watch during its meetings with his staff. Perhaps this is because he is ashamed of his conduct," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman……"

NewsMax.com 6/14/00 Carl Limbacher "….When the White House announced last week that Vice President Al Gore's e-mail for eleven key months before and just after Bill Clinton's impeahcment had been "lost forever," no one could have been more astonished than L. Jean Lewis. Lewis was the Resolution Trust Corporation investigator who uncovered the series of land flips, insider deals and check kiting scams at Little Rock's Madison Guarantee Savings and Loan that became known as the Whitewater scandal. …….. Way back in 1992, she wrote the very first Whitewater criminal referral naming Bill and Hillary Clinton as witnesses to and possible beneficiaries of bank fraud. A year later, after the explosive document made its way up the bureaucratic food chain, Lewis' Whitewater probe set off the Clinton White House's smoke alarms. ……. By 1995 the scandal uncovered by Lewis was comsuming the White House. Hillary Clinton's chief of staff Maggie Williams admitted privately that the first lady was now "paralyzed" with fear. What's more, Jean Lewis was about to get her chance to tell what she knew to the Senate Whitewater Committee……… Once Senate Republicans called Lewis to testify, Clinton strategists realized they'd have to do something to stop her. And the way they and their Congressional allies decided to do it was to go after her e-mail. Democrats on the Senate Whitewater Committee subpoenaed all Lewis' relevant written correspondence, some of which she had stored on computer disks. Also on those same disks: private letters that had nothing to do with her investigation. …….. Lewis had simply deleted the personal mail and handed the disk over to Democrat staffers. Just like Vice President Gore, she presumed that her deleted mail was "lost forever." But thanks to White House ingenuity, it turned out she presumed wrong. …….."

NewsMax.com 6/14/00 Carl Limbacher "….When it came time to cross examine Lewis in televised hearings, chief Democratic Whitewater counsel Richard Ben Veniste hit the RTC prober with embarrassing revelations gleaned from private letters that had nothing whatsoever to do with Whitewater. ……… Some of the information was about her teenage stepson, who was humiliated before the world in an attempt to discredit Lewis. Other tidbits revealed that Lewis had a political dislike for Bill Clinton even before she began looking into Whitewater -- and had once even considered marketing a line a anti-Clinton T-shirts. …….. Suddenly the investigator with a spotless record and a personnel file folder full of commendations was being smeared as a "Clinton-hater" and a "gold digger" whose testimony was so hopelessly tainted by bias that it could net be taken seriously. …….Lewis, who suffered from high blood pressure, was so rattled by the invasion of privacy that she collapsed right there at the witness table and had to be taken to a doctor. ...... Though nothing Clinton's allies on the Whitewater panel had unearthed about Lewis compromised her testimony or the evidence she presented in any way, White House spinmeisters made no secret of their joy that the woman who started Whitewater had been discredited. "The left is very good at retrieving information when it needs to be," Landmark Legal Foundation President Mark Levin told NewsMax.com on Tuesday. Landmark represented Lewis at the time of her testimony. ……..Having personally witnessed the lengths to which the White House went to get deleted files when it helped their case, Levin is mystified over claims that Gore's e-mail is beyond the reach of even the experts they sicced on Jean Lewis: ……"

latimes.com 6/10/00 Robert L Jackson "……As the successor to Kenneth W. Starr, one of the most vilified public figures in recent times, Robert W. Ray harbors no illusions that completing all the Whitewater-related investigations is going to bring him a ringing chorus of praise. But as independent counsel, Ray hopes that both friends and foes of the Clinton administration, and all those in between, will be satisfied with his final reports when he finishes his work early next year. "I didn't ask for this," says Ray, 40, a former federal prosecutor from New York who reluctantly agreed to move up from a senior deputy's job when Starr stepped down after five years last October. A panel of appellate judges almost immediately selected Ray over five others. …….. Ray realizes that any report on the Clintons' dealings could have an effect on Mrs. Clinton's U.S. Senate race in New York, but he insists that the circumstances are unavoidable. Without disclosing his tentative conclusions, Ray observes that, "if I sit here and do nothing, that also has an effect on the campaign, and I could be accused of allowing a lingering cloud to remain that otherwise should have been dispelled." The most he can hope for, he says, is that his report will be viewed as a fair one and "will not have an improper effect on the electoral process." ….."

 

AP 7/8/00 "……David Hale, the prosecution's key witness in the Whitewater investigation of President Clinton's business dealings, won't have to answer to an unrelated lawsuit because the plaintiff couldn't find Hale to serve him with the lawsuit by a mandated deadline. ……. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza dismissed the 1999 lawsuit against Hale because Marilyn Wallace, executor for the estate of Carrie Floy Rickett of Little Rock, did not serve Hale with the necessary legal papers within four months after the lawsuit was filed. …… The lawsuit accused Hale of reneging on a 1990 loan from Rickett for $94,834. ………Hale, a former judge and small-business lender, has a home address in Shreveport, La., according to federal court documents. But Friday, Dean Wallace, husband of Marilyn Wallace, said, "We looked for him everywhere." ……"

Washington Post 7/8/00 Bill Miller "….. Charles G. Bakaly III, who faces a contempt-of-court trial next week and was a top aide to then-independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr, is accused of making "false and misleading statements" to a judge investigating allegations about improper news leaks. Details emerged yesterday in newly released court documents about the criminal charge facing Bakaly, who worked as Starr's chief spokesman during the Monica S. Lewinsky investigation and impeachment proceedings against President Clinton. Most of the documents in Bakaly's case remain sealed under a court order……Bakaly will stand trial in U.S. District Court next Thursday on a charge stemming from a New York Times article that reported Starr had concluded he had the constitutional authority to seek an indictment of Clinton while the president was still in office……."

Judicial Watch 6/22/00 "……..If there was ever one scandal in the Clinton Administration that was simple to prove and which touched the average American, it was the firing and subsequent prosecution by Hillary Rodham Clinton of the Travel Office workers. In an unprecedented attempt to insert Hollywood friends into the running of this office, most likely for the personal profit of the Clintons themselves, Billy Dale and others were unjustly accused and prosecuted for alleged improper financial practices. If this wasn't enough, characteristically, the Internal Revenue Service was sicced on Mr. Dale. All charges against Dale and the other Travel Office workers were thrown out in record time, but the stench of Travelgate lives on……..During Judicial Watch's $90-million class-action Filegate lawsuit, it uncovered hard evidence that Hillary Clinton was the mastermind of Travelgate. Indeed, the FBI files of the Travel Office workers were improperly in Vince Foster's office shortly before he died. After Foster's death, they were removed and likely taken to The White House residence where they were apparently stored in a closet used by Mrs. Clinton to hide documents. The testimony of Mack McLarty confirms that he consulted regularly with Mrs. Clinton over the Travel Office scandal, but an affidavit provided by Mrs. Clinton to Congress falsely states that she had no involvement at all. In this context, the prosecution of Mrs. Clinton is a "slam dunk" -- yet Independent Counsel Robert Ray now says he will take no action, as he took no action in the related Filegate scandal……."

Judicial Watch 6/24/00 "…… On today's edition of The Judicial Watch Report, key Travelgate figure and Judicial Watch client, Billy Dale, Author Barbara Olson, and Dr. James Hirsen joined Larry Klayman and Tom Fitton for a newsmaking show. Billy Dale stated that he was never contacted by Independent Counsel Robert Ray regarding his firsthand knowledge of the Travelgate scandal. Ray, similar to his actions in Filegate, has closed the investigation without obtaining all of the facts or interviewing the key players. Also publically disclosed for the first time was the fact that former bar bouncer and Chief of White House Personnel Security, Craig Livingstone, personally escorted Mr. Dale out his workplace after he was fired. The incident occurred one week before Mr. Dale's planned retirement…….."

Washington Post via Drudge 7/10/00John Solomon "……Charles Bakaly, the former Kenneth Starr lieutenant accused of misleading a judge about a press leak, struck back Monday in court filings that suggested independent counsel lawyers were to blame for the problem. Bakaly alleged in a pretrial brief that he detailed his role in a disputed January 1999 news story to lawyers for Starr's office, but the lawyers narrowed his account before filing a statement with a federal judge on his behalf. ……. He also argued he shouldn't be prosecuted because an appeals court has concluded that none of the information in the news story was protected by grand jury secrecy rules. …….Bakaly's lawyers argued he doesn't believe any of the four statements were false, but if read that way by the court "Mr. Bakaly is not responsible for and did not cause that falseness." ……… He alleged that in one instance Starr's lawyers declined to change language in the sworn statement to make it more detailed and accurate - as Bakaly requested - because the lawyers wanted to keep the information from President Clinton's attorney. …….In another instance, he said lawyers told him they had left out relevant information from his sworn statement because they wanted "to provide the minimum amount of information while fully complying with what was required." ……."

CNN 7/11/00 "……Newly released court documents allege that Charles Bakaly, while employed as a spokesman for former Independent Counsel Ken Starr, leaked information to The New York Times about the counsel office's deliberations against President Clinton. At issue is an article headlined, "Starr is weighing whether to indict sitting president." The item was published on January 31, 1999 during the impeachment proceedings. ……… Bakaly is quoted in the article as saying, "We will not discuss the plans of this office or the plans of the grand jury in any way, shape or form." …… Bakaly's lawyers have filed documents saying none of his statements was false and none was material to the court's proceedings. An appeals court has ruled that the information was not protected by grand jury secrecy rules. ….Bakaly claims that Starr's prosecutors failed to fully inform the court of all the information he had provided them. …… ….."

CNN 7/11/00 "……While talking to Starr's prosecutors, Bakaly said that he had provided the reporter part of a memorandum that discussed deliberations of the Watergate prosecution, according to court records. But Bakaly continued to deny he was one of the "associates" who provided information to the newspaper, the records say. ……. The FBI ultimately began investigating the allegations. According to the court records, in one FBI interview, Bakaly said he may have "inadvertently confirmed" some of the reporter's information. ……. In a subsequent interview, Bakaly allegedly admitted he was one of the unnamed "associates" in the article. At the conclusion of the interview, Bakaly allegedly said he would "be disbarred and possibly prosecuted," according to the court records. ….."

Washington Times 7/12/00 "……If, as the Justice Department charges in its oddball contempt-of-court case against Charles G. Bakaly III, the former spokesman for Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr did confirm to a New York Times reporter that President Clinton might face indictment by the independent counsel, it's hard to summon the requisite outrage to clamor for putting the man behind bars. After all, any independent counsel worth his independence might indict a target of his investigation. No one needs Deep Throat to figure that out……… This was not the first time Judge Johnson, who oversees the grand jury, had opened a leaks inquiry. Nor was it the first time the judge would be overruled on the matter…….Recall that beginning in February 1998, David Kendall, Mr. Clinton's personal lawyer, opened a daring new front in the public relations war by charging that the Office of Independent Counsel (OIC) was leaking confidential grand jury information. An appeals court ultimately judged the charges groundless, but they certainly impressed U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, who has consistently ruled against the OIC on Mr. Kendall's leak charges. Her rulings have not exactly stood the test of time. At last count, Judge Johnson had been reined in on three separate occasions by a federal appeals court for her rather extravagant, even Kendallian readings of grand jury secrecy rules - which, if allowed to stand, would outlaw most lawyer-reporter exchanges outside lunch orders…….."

Washington Times 7/12/00 "……The New York Times article is a case in point. Having determined that the article contained no grand jury secrets, an appeals court panel unanimously overruled Judge Johnson in September 1999, thus preventing her from initiating contempt proceedings against Mr. Starr and the OIC staff. (Even the Justice Department, appointed by Judge Johnson as prosecutor against the OIC, agreed there had been no violation of grand jury secrecy rules.) So how is it that Mr. Bakaly now stands trial for charges stemming from the same article?………The answer verges on the Kakfaesque. Mr. Bakaly stands accused, not of leaking grand jury secrets, but rather of falsely denying that he gave what the Justice Department calls "nonpublic information" to a reporter - presumably concerning the possible indictment of Mr. Clinton. His lawyers contend that he was simply confirming "a truism." In their pretrial brief, they also argue that the three sworn statements in question were edited and amended against Mr. Bakaly's wishes by OIC prosecutors to reveal as little as possible to Mr. Clinton's lawyers, even to the point of suggesting that Mr. Bakaly had provided no information whatsoever to the reporter - not even a truism. Does the phrase "frivolous case" begin to form in the cranial cavity? ….."

Drudge/AP 7/5/00 James Jefferson "……Former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker won't have to pay $1 million in restitution but federal prosecutors will get another chance to prove he owes at least that much. An 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel on Monday overturned the restitution portion of Tucker's sentence for conspiring to avoid paying taxes through a sham bankruptcy of a Florida cable TV company. The case was sent back to federal court in Arkansas for re-sentencing on the restitution issue. The rest of the sentence stands: four years' probation, a $6,000 fine and community service. ……."

YAHOO News/REUTERS 7/4/00 Steve Barnes "…….A federal appeals court voided a million-dollar restitution order in a Whitewater criminal case Monday but gave prosecutors a second chance to collect it or an even larger judgement. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said deputies to former Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr had failed to prove that a ``sham bankruptcy'' plotted by former Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker and others had resulted in a loss to the U.S. Treasury and voided the $1 million in restitution a judge ordered when Tucker pleaded guilty in the case in 1998. ``The government introduced no evidence as to tax loss,'' the appeals court said. …… ``The government's failure to satisfy its evidentiary burden requires us to reverse the district court's $1 million restitution and to remand the case for resentencing,'' the three-judge panel wrote. ……But the appeals court also said it calculated that Tucker could be liable for an even larger restitution order and Whitewater prosecutors should have a chance to prove as much. ….."

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 6/22/00 John Magsam ".......Air Force One dropped out of a cloudy sky like one of the millions of raindrops falling on Northwest Arkansas on Wednesday morning, bringing President Clinton and his family for a quick visit to see an ill friend. ........ During the Whitewater investigation, James McDougal, a key figure in the land deal, said Diane Blair was the architect of the plan. ........ The first family brought a large bouquet of bright red, white and pink flowers with them, presumably as a gift for Diane Blair, a longtime family friend. Blair, who retired from teaching political science at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, is ill with cancer. A source close to Blair said that her health is declining. Her husband Jim Blair is the retired chief counsel for Tyson Foods. ......."

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 6/22/00 John Magsam ".......This is the fourth Clinton visit to Arkansas since April, and the third visit to the Blairs. The friendship between the Clintons and Blairs dates back more than 25 years. Jim Blair and Bill Clinton met at the Democratic Convention in Miami in 1972 and learned they'd soon be neighbors, since Clinton had accepted a job teaching law at the UA, where Jim Blair was an adjunct professor. .......... Through the years, the Blairs were frequent political advisers. During the 1992 presidential campaign, Diane Blair worked as a senior researcher, troubleshooting for Clinton and defending his career as governor. .......In addition to being a friend, Diane Blair also has served as a financial counselor to the Clintons. Diane Blair was Hillary Clinton's adviser during a nine-month period in 1978 and 1979, when she turned a $ 1,000 investment in the cattle futures market into nearly $ 100,000. ...... During the Whitewater investigation, James McDougal, a key figure in the land deal, said Diane Blair was the architect of the plan. ........ "

 

Freeper Uncle Bill ……"One of the employees, John P. McSweeney, testified before Congress as follows: "Although I have been a registered Democrat for 44 years, it was not a political but a civil service appointment. This came to an abrupt halt while I was on leave in Ireland when my son Jim called to inform me that the evening news shows had just announced that the entire staff of our office had been fired and that the FBI was starting an investigation for possible criminal activity. …….Although the White House recognized that not all of us had any financial authority, for the next 30 months we all became part of a full-blown Department of Justice investigation with Billy Dale (the head of the Department) as their target. For myself, it involved FBI agents interviewing my neighbors, two grand jury appearances, two Justice Department and FBI interviews, and one meeting with the IRS, along with legal fees of over $65,000. Over time, where before I had been intimidated, it now turned to complete frustration as the White House had free rein with the media in putting out its story while we were muzzled by the Justice Department. They presented me with a letter that stated that I was not a subject or target of their investigation at the present time, which meant that anything I said could be used against me." …..Mr. McSweeney was one of the lucky ones. The FBI quickly tried to make the head of the Travel Office, Billy Dale, its scapegoat." …….The lucky ones? Nope. If you check the Washington Post obituaries dated October 20, 1998, you'll see that Mr. McSweeney IS DEAD.

WorldNetDaily.com 8/1/00 Paul Sperry "…..Hearings into missing White House e-mail took a surprise turn yesterday when a former White House computer manager said she told Congress about gaps in e-mail records almost two years ago. The federal court testimony undercuts GOP lawmakers' claims that the White House never told them the subpoenaed e-mails were missing until this year. …….. Sheryl Hall, a former branch chief in the White House's computer division, said she secretly briefed a House investigator in November 1998 about the records gap, known internally as "Project X." She says the Republican staff lawyer, who went on to work for the independent counsel, didn't follow up on her complaint. The lawyer, Keith Ausbrook, told WorldNetDaily he doesn't recall talking about Project X with Hall. ……"

WorldNetDaily.com 8/1/00 Paul Sperry "…..Hall's talk with Ausbrook also raises the question of what and when the independent counsel's office knew about Project X. Ausbrook joined the independent counsel's staff in February 1999 -- just over two months after Hall says she told him the White House didn't search all its e-mail records in response to subpoenas. Both Congress and Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr had issued subpoenas for White House e-mails. Starr's successor, Robert Ray, just this April launched a criminal probe to see if the White House tried to cover up the e-mail records gap. ….."If she had told me about it, I would have done something about it," Ausbrook said. ….. She said she met with Ausbrook at his House Rayburn Building office around 6 p.m. on Nov. 30, 1998 -- about five months after a huge gap in mostly West Wing e-mail was discovered by Haas and other contractors. "I told him there was a computer mistake and over 100,000 e-mails were missing," she said. "And all these (subpoena) searches have been invalid lately." She also recalled describing the problem as "Project X." ……"

ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE 8/2/00 Michael Rowett "…..Former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker has asked a circuit court to postpone action on a disbarment suit against him until a federal court decides whether his participation in a sham bankruptcy scheme resulted in a tax loss to the U.S. government. Tucker's request was filed Monday in response to the Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct's March 9 motion for summary judgment in the disbarment case. ….."

Judicial Watch 7/28/00 "……Today, the so-called "Independent Counsel" released his Filegate report and, not surprisingly, after failing to interview or call before the grand jury most of the key witnesses, found no wrongdoing in the ongoing Filegate scandal. Independent Counsel Ray has been reported to be a lifelong Democrat with political aspirations. See "Forgotten but Not Gone, Starr's Heir Presses On," The New York Times, Melinda Henneberger, March 25, 2000. "Obviously,finding against the Clinton-Gore Administration and Mrs. Hillary Clinton would have been good for his political health," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman………..Recently, Ray whitewashed the Travelgate investigation, again doing another favor for Hillary Clinton, finding again, even though she admittedly was not truthful, that the First Lady would not be prosecuted because a D.C. jury would never convict. "Independent Counsel Ray is a 'political animal' of the highest magnitude," added Klayman…….."

AP via Yahoo! 7/28/00 Pete Yost "…….The key figure in the FBI files controversy admitted lying to Congress and to a federal grand jury, but a final report revealed Friday that he could not be prosecuted because he was granted immunity by Independent Counsel Ken Starr. ……. A special federal appeals court issued the final report on the activities of Anthony Marceca, an Army detailee who, as a temporary White House employee, collected hundreds of FBI background files in 1993-94 based on an outdated Secret Service list. Many of the files were those of ex-White House pass-holders from the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush. …….In his immunized testimony, Marceca admitted that in the midst of his gathering of FBI files, he realized that he was collecting data on some people who were no longer at the White House and didn't have passes anymore. Marceca admitted testifying falsely in 1996 by having told Congress and a grand jury the opposite - that it didn't occur to him that some people on the Secret Service list he was using were no longer pass-holders, according to Ray's final report. …….In his immunized testimony, Marceca also admitted that he lied by telling congressional investigators in 1996 that ``he didn't waste time'' reading some of the background reports. According to Ray's final report, Marceca admitted that he read the FBI files as soon as he received them, seeking information for ``previous arrests, ... that sort of stuff.'' ……"

New York Times 7/29/00Neil Lewis "…..The Clinton administration improperly acquired hundreds of F.B.I. files through a series of errors committed by the Secret Service and, most of all, by an incompetent investigator in the White House, according to a report by the independent counsel that was released today. ………. The report concluded that the files, many of which involved prominent Republicans, were acquired by the White House office of personnel security mainly through the mistakes of Anthony Marceca, a low-level employee there. ……. From the time he started his work in August 1993 until he left the next year, he requisitioned more than 1,100 such files. The independent counsel report said that at least 726 of them were for people who no longer worked at the White House. ………. In explaining why Mr. Ray concluded that was not so, the report said investigators found that Mr. Marceca requisitioned the files using an inaccurate list provided by the Secret Service. Although the Secret Service has denied that it was responsible for preparing such a list, Mr. Ray found that the Secret Service had in fact prepared a list that was "unlabeled and overinclusive." ……..Mr. Ray's report said that Mr. Marceca admitted lying to Congress and to a federal grand jury but that he could not be prosecuted because he had been given immunity by federal prosecutors. In any event, the report said, nothing in his testimony affected the conclusion that there was not any conspiracy to obtain Republican files. …….."

CBSNEWS 8/17/00 Andrew Cohen AP "….. (CBS) Just when you thought it was safe to forget all you ever learned about Monica Lewinsky and Betty Currie and the box of gifts under the bed and what the definition of "is" is, comes word that a new grand jury has been empaneled to look into allegations of criminal conduct against President Clinton relating to his relationship with Lewinsky. ……. For example, does the presence of the new grand jury mean that Independent Counsel Robert Ray somehow got a whiff of new information or evidence that was not available to his predecessor, Kenneth Starr, before Starr's grand jury ended its work? Does Ray need the new grand jury's broad subpoena powers to dig a little deeper into those new nuggets of information in order to close the book on the investigation, once and for all? Or does Ray simply want to run the old evidence by a new group of ordinary folks to see whether they believe that the president should be indicted for his role in the Lewinsky "cover-up"? Does the involvement of a new grand jury confirm, then, that Starr's grand jury wasn't even asked to bring criminal charges against the president? ……"

New York Times 8/18/00 David Johnston "……The independent counsel investigating President Clinton's relationship with a White House intern has impaneled a new grand jury to hear evidence in the case, government officials said today. …… The White House reacted angrily to the grand jury disclosure, which came hours before Vice President Al Gore was to accept the Democratic Party's nomination for president. "The timing of this leak reeks to high heaven," a White House spokesman Jake Siewert said. Karen P. Hughes, communications director for Gov. George W. Bush of Texas, the Republican presidential nominee, said the timing was unfortunate. "We think the timing was wrong," Ms. Hughes said. "It was simply not appropriate for this type of news to come out on Al Gore's big day. This election is not about the past and it's not about President Clinton." ……."

AP wire 8/17/00 Pete Yost "…..Opening the door to criminal charges, Independent Counsel Robert Ray has empaneled a new grand jury to hear evidence against President Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky scandal, legal sources said Thursday. The move follows through on Ray's promise to weigh whether the president should be indicted after he steps down from office next January, the sources told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity. The grand jury was empaneled on July 11 and prosecutors identified the Lewinsky case as the sole purpose of investigation for the panel, said the sources, who are outside Ray's office. …… The issue for Ray is whether Clinton's conduct amounted to criminal conduct. ….."

ABC News 9/5/00 Josh Gersteiin "…..One of the most powerful entities on the American political scene is trying to hush up the results of a government investigation into alleged corruption on the part of some of the country's most prominent public figures. Who's behind this effort to prevent the public from learning what evidence investigators gathered with taxpayer dollars? A high-powered lobbyist? A top criminal defense lawyer? Maybe a Beltway fixer? Nope. The call to suppress the results of this multimillion-dollar probe is coming from a most unlikely source: The New York Times. ……… In an editorial last week, the Times declared that Independent Counsel Robert Ray should scrap his plan to report this month on the so-called Whitewater allegations against President Clinton and the first lady. "The need for an orderly election overrides the need for a detailed report summing up the prosecutor's findings," the Times argued. "In the absence of stunning new information worthy of prosecution, he should stand aside and let the voters decide based on the existing voluminous public record." You'd be forgiven for reading the bizarre editorial twice. After all, it's not everyday that a newspaper crusades to keep information from its readers. ……. The logic of the paper's argument is truly baffling. Is the Times saying Ray's analysis isn't newsworthy? Does anyone doubt for a moment that, if one of the paper's reporters got a draft of the report, it would run on the front page? ……The paper's editorial board is clearly concerned that Ray's report would unfairly disrupt Hillary Rodham Clinton's race for the Senate. …."

WorldNetDaily 9/13/00 Paul Sperry "…… Lending credence to complaints of a botched investigation, Former Special Counsel Robert Fiske never seized nor even tried to seize Vincent Foster's computer as evidence after the deputy White House counsel died unexpectedly in 1993, WorldNetDaily has learned. …… …… Only now are agents for the latest independent counsel, Robert Ray, trying to look at all the files, deleted and undeleted, on what appears to be Foster's hard drive. They're also trying to interview former White House officials who handled the drive, including Jim "Mack" MacDonald, the computer division chief whose story has gone untold -- until now. …… …. Not until Fiske's successor, Kenneth Starr, took over the investigation in August 1994 -- a year after Foster's death -- did authorities become interested in seizing Foster's computer, MacDonald says.. ….MacDonald, former director of the White House's Information Systems and Technology division, says FBI agents paid him a visit at his New Executive Office Building office in the summer of 1994. "It was embarrassing for them to ask (for Foster's computer)," he recalled. "I mean, they had no idea where this thing was." ……. An inventory check by MacDonald showed Foster's computer missing at the time. It was supposed to be in his old West Wing office. So agents went away empty-handed. ……. Several months later, MacDonald says he stumbled on the central-processing unit, or CPU, of Foster's computer while in a meeting in an office on the 2nd Floor of the Old Executive Office Building. He says he spotted it on the floor and asked, "Whose PC is that?" No one knew, he says, so he checked it out. "When I picked it up and looked at the serial number, I about fell over, because it was the Foster serial number we'd been looking for," MacDonald said. "I crossed Pennsylvania Avenue and carried it over to the Data Center on the 4th Floor in the NEOB." …… He says he wrapped it in plastic, affixed a label to it -- "FOSTER PC" -- and placed it in a tall, wheeled cabinet on the north wall near the VAX mainframes. He says he then locked the cabinet doors. ...... …….. A White House employee, however, has sworn that MacDonald was more than just nervous. ……. "After Vincent Foster died, I received a call from Jim MacDonald, who wanted me to meet him outside to go for a ride with him. During that ride, Mr. MacDonald informed me that he had found Vincent Foster's computer," said Howard "Chip" Sparks in a June 19 federal court affidavit. Sparks, a White House computer network specialist, worked for MacDonald. "In the wake of the mysterious circumstances surrounding Mr. Foster's death, Mr. MacDonald was extremely upset by his discovery," Sparks added. "And he told me that he was concerned that he would be killed because of what he had found." Asked about it, MacDonald downplayed Sparks' account, insisting: "I didn't think someone would shoot me." .........……. "

WorldNetDaily 9/13/00 Paul Sperry "…… Here is Hall's version of what happened. …….. Shortly after finding Foster's CPU, Hall says MacDonald asked her to tap one of her technicians, Dorothy "Dottie" Crumling, to run a software program to break into some of Foster's password-protected files. The exercise worked. She says they were able to read one file that revealed Foster and his wife had plans for the night of July 20, 1993 -- the day he was found dead. ….. Later in 1994, Hall says MacDonald had a former White House computer contractor, Mike Saunders, remove the hard drive from Foster's CPU. MacDonald kept it in his office, she says. ……."It was on Mack's desk," she said. …… When MacDonald left the White House the next year, he gave the hard drive to Jurg Hochuli, who was the Office of Administration finance director, Hall says. "Jurg had it on a bookshelf behind his desk," she said. ...... Hall came into possession of the hard drive after she says MacDonald, who hired her, called her and asked her to pick it up from Hochuli, who transferred to the State Department. He now works there under former top Clinton aide Patsy Thomasson. ……. "Mack called me from California and told me to get it," Hall said. "I've often wondered why he did it." ……. Hall took the hard drive home. A few years ago, she says, Starr's investigators interviewed her about the White House phone records. Hall at one time was in charge of the PBX system there, too. And Foster's computer got brought up. Hall says she later agreed to give senior counsel Jay Apperson half of the hard drive (her husband split up the disks). She held back half of it for "insurance," saying she didn't trust Starr. Now Ray's office has the whole drive. And Hall has been subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury. ......She says she was granted immunity from prosecution for taking possession of the Foster hard drive in exchange for the evidence and her testimony. She demanded her husband also be granted immunity before she'd cooperate. Don Hall, a computer contractor, took the hard drive apart. ……. "

CNSNews.com 9/2/00 Bob Melvin "….. Independent Counsel Robert Ray's plan to divulge his Whitewater conclusions just weeks before voters decide whether to elect Hillary Rodham Clinton to the Senate in New York is being criticized by Democrats and some legal experts, according to wire service reports. Ray "is defying the law," says Democratic Senator Carl Levin, adding that the law requires the counsel to issue his findings under seal to a court and makes no provision for a separate public accounting. ……."

New York Times 8/29/00 Neil Lewis "…….Robert W. Ray, the independent counsel, said he expected to issue a statement of his findings and conclusions about the Whitewater investigation a few weeks before New York voters go to the polls to choose between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Representative Rick A. Lazio, her Republican opponent for the United States Senate. ……. Mr. Ray, whose office has investigated President and Mrs. Clinton on a range of issues for more than four years, also said in an interview that he would announce his decision on whether he would seek an indictment of Mr. Clinton in connection with his affair with a White House intern shortly after the president left office. ……The prosecutor suggested that the announcement about the possible indictment of Mr. Clinton would come within weeks after a new president is inaugurated on Jan. 20. Mr. Ray has already issued two reports, one essentially clearing the Clintons in the collection of confidential F.B.I. files about Republicans and another critical of Mrs. Clinton's role in the dismissal of longtime employees in the White House travel office. ……"

NewsMax.com 8/28/00 Carl Limbacher "…… Independent Counsel Robert Ray's decision to impanel a new grand jury to hear evidence in the Monica Lewinsky case indicates he believes there's a good chance it will indict President Clinton for perjury, legal experts told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on Monday. Though Clinton's indictment would probably come after he leaves office, the new criminal investigation of the president is viewed by the legal community as a serious step toward his prosecution. "You don't do that kind of thing lightly," Buckner Melton Jr., a constitutional law expert at the University of North Carolina, told the Democrat-Gazette. "You have to presume (Ray) is finding something to keep his interest up." "The prospect of a president, even an ex-president, being indicted is not something that anyone looks forward to," said Rep. Asa Hutchinson, R-Ark., who believes Clinton is criminally liable and tried to prove it as one of the House impeachment managers……."

Los Angeles Times 8/18/00 Jonathan Turley "……. Independent Counsel Robert Ray may have the strangest and most conflicted job in America. As the independent counsel investigating the president, Ray's job description is clear and unambiguous: He must prosecute the president if he finds compelling evidence of criminal conduct. However, his ultimate employer-the public-is overwhelmingly against such a prosecution and he would invite his own ruin if he faithfully carried out his mandate. Yet, this is not like asking the town sheriff to take a well-timed fishing trip to avoid witnessing crimes. At the end of the day, Ray has to stand in the middle of compelling evidence of criminal conduct and claim that he sees nothing that demands a response. ……."

Associated Press 8/23/00 "……Responding to criticism of the $55.5 million spent investigating the Clintons, Independent Counsel Robert Ray said Wednesday that his probe involves ``serious allegations'' of misconduct by the president. Ray defended his probe after Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said ``it is time for the independent counsel to file his report, pack it up and go home.'' Leahy said ``these millions and millions of dollars would have been better spent on serious criminal investigations that could make a real difference.'' Ray said that ``our expenditures are necessary and appropriate'' and involve ``serious allegations of perjury and obstruction of justice by the President of the United States -- matters which appropriately constitute a `serious criminal investigation.'''......"

MRC 8/28/00 Freeper report "….. Independent Counsel Robert Ray is still waiting for an apology from Dan Rather for linking him to the leak about how he had empaneled a grand jury to look at Bill Clinton's Lewinsky-related statements, the New York Post reported Friday………. In an August 25 item highlighted by Jim Romenesko's MediaNews and brought to my attention by the MRC's Tim Graham, "Page Six" writer Richard Johnson, with Paula Froelich and Chris Wilson, relayed:……. But the next day, when Ray confirmed the report, U.S. Appellate Court Judge Richard D. Cudahy, a Democrat and one of three federal judges on the panel that supervises Ray, released a statement that he was accidentally the source for the story.... Ray is still waiting for Rather to follow suit. "We considered [Rather's reports] to be unbalanced," Keith Ausbrook, senior counsel in Ray's office told The Post. "Except for Judge Cudahy, we haven't received any apology."…… He shouldn't hold his breath. Rather doesn't seem in any hurry to make amends. Rather's spokesperson, Kim Akhtar, was out of the office and unavailable for comment, but another CBS staffer said Rather is off fishing in some remote locale……"

New York Post 8/20/00 "......But Ray's new grand jury is apparently studying whether to charge Clinton with criminal perjury. Previously, Judge Susan Webber Wright, who oversaw the Paula Jones case, found Clinton in contempt of court for his false and misleading testimony and fined him $90,000. Clinton did not contest the fine. Any indictment would likely not come until after Clinton leaves office. While many people would just like these scandals to end once and for all, the grand jury investigation rests on the proposition that not even the president is above the law. ....... For our part, we'd like to see the president get no more than what he deserves. ......Maybe the leak was unintentional or maybe it wasn't, but the Democrats' rush to implicate Republicans - and score political points - while closing their eyes to their own leader's transgressions says enough. ......"

AP via Newsday.com 9/21/00 James Jefferson "……Arkansans are saying ''I told you so'' one more time after Independent Counsel Robert Ray decided President Clinton and wife Hillary Rodham Clinton should not be indicted in the Whitewater investigation. But it's a hollow victory for more than a dozen state residents who were caught and convicted in the limelight of a national investigation. In wrapping up the most expensive independent counsel inquiry in history, Ray, who succeeded Kenneth Starr, issued a statement Wednesday saying there was ''insufficient'' or ''inconclusive'' evidence to warrant charges against the president and first lady ..."

Opinion Journal(Lead Editorial Wall Street Journal) 9/20/00 "…… In itself Whitewater is an ancient land deal in Arkansas, of course, but attempts to cover up its embarrassment continued into the Clinton White House and indeed until today. The heart of the problem was a corrupt savings and loan, Madison Guaranty, owned by Clinton Whitewater partners James and Susan McDougal. It collapsed at a $73 million loss to taxpayers. At the time of their Whitewater partnership, the Clintons may or may not have known what Mr. McDougal was up to, but by the time Bill ran for President the debacle was clear enough. Just as Bill could have settled the Paula Jones case, the Clintons could have chosen to out the Whitewater mess and move on, for example by waiving privileges, as Jimmy Carter did over his peanut farm or Ronald Reagan did over Iran-contra. …….. Instead, the Clintons and their lawyers established an ethos of stonewalls, shady statements, slick lawyering, witness intimidation and rhetorical assaults on public servants. The key players either kept quiet or were completely discredited by a brutal White House attack machine. The walls were dented by the early, successful prosecutions of the McDougals and Arkansas insider Webster Hubbell, once the No. 3 man at the Department of Justice. But Mr. Hubbell kept his mouth shut. Susan McDougal did hard time without talking; finally questioned by prosecutors, she said more than 40 times that she was unable to recall business dealings related to Madison and Whitewater. Questioned in 1996 by federal investigators about her own work for Madison, Mrs. Clinton said 99 times in a two-hour interview that she couldn't recall. ….. Jim McDougal decided to cooperate late in the game but died in prison, his potential testimony tarnished by fraud convictions. Arkansas insider David Hale was smeared from the outset. Investigators such as the Resolution Trust Corp.'s Jean Lewis, not to mention Kenneth Starr, were subjected to a character assassination rarely seen in public life…….The result was a series of investigations yielding evidence "insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt." This is not to say no evidence…….. The finding of insufficient evidence to persuade a jury beyond a reasonable doubt is understandable. But it is by no means an exoneration of the Clintons for their conduct in either Whitewater or the White House……"

Reuters 9/20/00 "……Independent counsel Robert Ray said on Wednesday that there was insufficient evidence to prove that President Clinton (news - web sites) and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton (news - web sites) engaged in criminal conduct in the Whitewater land deal in Arkansas. ….. ``The office determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either (the) president or Mrs. Clinton knowingly participated in any criminal conduct,'' Ray said in a statement summarizing the findings. ……"

New York Times 9/21/00 "……. In a brief and businesslike statement, the independent counsel Robert Ray said yesterday that the six-year investigation into Whitewater had produced "insufficient" evidence to justify criminal charges against President and Hillary Rodham Clinton. But while the statement came as a great relief to the White House, Mr. Ray's terse legal judgment does not excuse the White House's long record of obfuscation in the Whitewater matter, including its clumsy meddling with official inquiries and its failure to produce relevant records in a timely manner…….. After tidying up some loose ends, Mr. Ray will turn his full report over to the three-judge panel that oversees his office. It should then be released so that the public can draw its own conclusions. In the meantime, Mr. Ray is to be commended for resisting any temptation to convey his private thoughts about these tangled events or otherwise politicize his conclusions in the final weeks of Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign in New York…….."

Judicial Watch 9/20/00 "…….Judicial Watch, Inc., the public interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes public corruption, reacted today to the Interdependent Counsel's closing the Whitewater matter without any prosecutions. Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman issued the following statement: The Independent Counsel's refusal to prosecute Bill and Hillary Clinton, and others, over Whitewater further shows our justice system has broken down. Independent Counsel Ray, according to The New York Times, is a lifelong Democrat with political aspirations, so it isn't surprising he'd come out with such a political conclusion. ……. Anyone who witnessed the in-your-face perjury, obstruction of justice, witness intimidation, and bribery in these matters is sure to be outraged…….. How can the Office of Independent Counsel come to any conclusions on Whitewater (let alone Filegate and Travelgate) when they have yet to talk to key witnesses and examine potentially millions of e-mail and computer and phone records which have been hidden by this White House for years?……"

Yahoo via Drudge 10/6/00 Reuters "……Kenneth Starr's former spokesman in the Monica Lewinsky probe was found not guilty on Friday of criminal contempt of court for lying about his role in news leaks during President Clinton's impeachment trial. The Justice Department had asked a federal judge to find that Charles Bakaly, the former spokesman for independent counsel Starr, be held in contempt for lying in a sworn court declaration when he denied that he leaked secret information to the New York Times. ``The court concludes that the government has not proved its charges beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore the court finds that Mr. Bakaly is not guilty of criminal contempt,'' Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson said in a written ruling. ……."

New York Times 10/7/00 David Stout "…… The former spokesman for the independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr was acquitted today of trying to hide his role in leaking information about Mr. Starr's investigation of President Clinton. The defendant, Charles G. Bakaly III, was found not guilty by Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, chief judge of the Federal District Court here, who heard the case without a jury in July. Mr. Bakaly would have faced up to six months in prison had he been convicted. "He and we are all, to understate the matter, pleased and gratified," a defense lawyer, Robert Weinberg, said after the verdict…….. Mr. Starr's successor, Robert W. Ray, issued a statement concluding, "This office accepts the judgment of the court."……… Mr. Bakaly had been charged with contempt of court for lying to the judge about how much he contributed to an article in The New York Times on Jan. 31, 1999. That article, by Don Van Natta Jr., cited unnamed associates of Mr. Starr as saying he had concluded that he had the constitutional authority to indict Mr. Clinton while he was in office……"

NewsMax.com 9/21/00 Carl Limbacher "……. Clearly Ray has given the Clintons an easy out, as he did so in his FBI files report. Though, we should note that Ray has inherited this mess from bumbling Starr. Had Ray been handling the case from the beginning the results may have been very different. Ray is known as being a tough character. He indicated to Lehrer he still has plans for the Clintons. …….. If he believed that Bill Clinton should not be indicted for matters relating to the Lewinsky scandal, he would have closed that case too. But he hasn't. In fact he has convened another grand jury. ……. But he made it crystal clear to Lehrer that he is waiting for Clinton to leave office before he brings any indictment. And there can be only one reason for keeping the case open: he wants to indict Bill Clinton as soon as he leaves office. Here's the exchange between Lehrer and Ray on a future Clinton indictment:
JIM LEHRER: Now, speaking of closure, you have also said publicly that you are... Well, I'll just ask you, are you still going to... are you still considering seeking an indictment, a criminal indictment against President Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky matter after he leaves office?
ROBERT RAY: I have said that that matter remains open, that it would be appropriate to render that judgment once the President leaves office. It is now publicly known. It was not my choice, but it has now become publicly known that there's a grand jury investigation in the District of Columbia with regard to that matter. And beyond that and given that fact, I cannot have any further comment.
JIM LEHRER: Doesn't that walk on your closure statement a moment ago or not? Did I misread what you're saying? In other words, it is... the cloud over President Clinton still exists, because there is a grand jury investigating the possibility or considering the possibility of indicting him, correct?
ROBERT RAY: Well, there are constitutional reasons why it is appropriate to not render that judgment until such time as the President leaves office. I think as a practical matter, as I have explained in other context, even if one were convinced that it was appropriate to bring charges and to bring them now, that would be a constitutional issue about whether or not a sitting United States President could be indicted. For that issue to be resolved, and it would have to ultimately be resolved by the United States Supreme Court, that would take us well beyond January 2001, and I do not render decisions in a vacuum. An appropriate decision, as I have said, will be rendered in January 2001. Now, I well understand that the viability of my office continues during the life of this administration and not much beyond it. And I fully intend to render a judgment with regard to that matter promptly.
JIM LEHRER: But I'm not sure I follow you on this, Mr. Ray. I'm not trying to be difficult, but clearly then if you had concluded that you were not going to seek a grand jury, you could announce it tomorrow, but the fact... an indictment against...you could announce that tomorrow. That doesn't impinge on any constitutional problem. It's the fact that -- so the only way to read this is that you are seriously considering seeking an indictment, correct?
ROBERT RAY: No. I can't comment.
JIM LEHRER: Did I misread that?
ROBERT RAY: No. I can't comment about that...
JIM LEHRER: But if you chose not to seek an indictment, there's nothing in the process that would preclude you from announcing that today. That's all I'm trying to get at, right? Am I right or wrong about that?
ROBERT RAY: Well, what I am telling you is there is a process under way, and it's a hypothetical question because you now know what it is my office is conducting. It is conducting a grand jury investigation with regard to the matter, and it will reach appropriate conclusions at the appropriate time. ……."

9/21/00 Jean Lewis to Jim Robinson "……. Now that the Whitewater/Madison Guaranty Savings investigation has finally - and officially - ended, I want to break a longstanding silence and say thank you. Thanks to the FreeRepublic crew and readership who offered their continuous support of the ongoing investigation by the Office of the Independent Counsel, and the consistent up-hill battle I fought while working for the RTC. The mainstream press may choose to spin the Whitewater outcome into a total vindication of the Clinton's, but as Robert Ray carefully pointed out, there is a substantial distinction between "insufficient evidence" and an absence of evidence. The evidence subsequently produced from the original RTC referrals was substantive enough to prompt an ongoing investigation the resulted in the indictment and conviction of the initial targets - Jim & Susan McDougal and Jim Guy Tucker. To that end, the original referrals were on target and the ensuing OIC investigation was a judicial success, as acknowledged by Judge Starr during his testimony before Congress. As Mr. Ray also noted, there was insufficient evidence to prove that there was any obstruction of justice perpetrated on the original RTC investigation; but the OIC is painfully aware, as am I, that it is very difficult it is to prove an intent to obstruct when the power of the Executive Stonewall has gone up and all the principals are marching in lock-step with their predetermined, carefully orchestrated stories in place. Those of us who lived, and/or investigated, the experience have long since drawn our own conclusions about the truth of what really happened. Unlike those who choose to engage in semantic parsing, we know what the "meaning" of the word "obstruction" is…………
I've watched, along with the rest of America, as the Clinton's, and the perimeter guard of their Executive branch, have spun, dodged, argued, accused and generally stonewalled their way through seven and a half years of scandal ridden presidency. And I've cheered for every courtroom success won by Judge Starr (and Bob Ray's) staff in the face of the ridiculously inventive presidential privileges conceived by the Clinton's and their attorneys. The OIC may have taken an unmerciless beating in the media, but they always won where it really counted - in the halls of Justice. Hat's off to the Office of the Independent Counsel for a job truly well done. ………
One parting thought in closing. Although Gene Lyons and Joe Conason have long delighted in pointing out their theory that I "dropped from sight" after the Hearings to retreat and lick my wounds, they missed the facts - as usual. As Mark Twain said ..."rumors of my demise are greatly exaggerated." I'm alive, well and quite happily engaged in pursuing a successful life in the private sector, having spent the last several years as a senior manager for a very large corporation. Post-Whitewater life is wonderful and satisfying, even amusing from time to time, with the occasional nuisance articles that appear on websites controlled by pack-minded liberals. But its the diversity and freedom that keep this Country great. So, long live both the conservatives and the liberals, and may we each continue to thrive in our own ways while keeping the discusson lively and the politics interesting! …….."

Houston Chronicle 12/31/00 Michael Hedges ".....President Clinton could be embroiled in a bitter legal battle within weeks of leaving office if prosecutor Robert Ray seeks an indictment of the president, as many here are predicting. Ray, who succeeded Clinton adversary Kenneth Starr as Whitewater independent counsel, has recently re-interviewed Monica Lewinsky. He will decide soon whether to seek perjury and maybe obstruction of justice charges against the president, who leaves office Jan. 20, sources close to the investigation said. "It has been full steam ahead," said a person with knowledge of the investigation. "I think it is safe to say (Ray) has always been leaning toward indicting Clinton." .......Legal analysts said the signs point to an increasing probability of charges against Clinton. ....."It is hard to think of any good reason for re-interviewing Monica Lewinsky unless Ray was planning to bring charges," said former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova. "I don't think you'd need to do it just to wrap up your report." ....... E. Lawrence Barcella, a Washington defense attorney, agreed. "Re-interviewing Lewinsky at this point certainly seems consistent with the idea of going forward with an indictment," he said. "She's already been interviewed two dozen times, so it wouldn't make sense otherwise." .......Prosecutors with the independent counsel's office have been reviewing other evidence as well, including phone tapes made public in 1993 by former Clinton girlfriend Gennifer Flowers, sources said. ...... In those tapes, Clinton and Flowers discussed ways to keep their relationship secret. DiGenova thought it was telling that Ray was apparently reviewing the Flowers tapes. "If Ray is thinking of bringing a perjury charge, you could use the tapes of those phone calls to show how this man has in the past coached witnesses," diGenova said. ....."

New York Times 10/19/00 Neil A Lewis "……In his final report about the firing of seven longtime employees of the White House travel office released today, Robert W. Ray, the independent counsel, asserted that Hillary Rodham Clinton had given "factually false" sworn testimony when she minimized her role in the incident....... For the first time, Mr. Ray disclosed parts of Mrs. Clinton's 1995 deposition he now says are demonstrably false. The report also discloses some of the grand jury testimony of others who spoke to Mrs. Clinton about the travel office…….. Mr. Ray said, as he had in June, that Mrs. Clinton had played a far greater role in the dismissals than she had admitted. The report cited evidence that she had repeatedly expressed concerns about the travel office to White House officials who eventually fired the employees as a result of what they had perceived to be pressure from her to do so…….. In the newly disclosed testimony by Mrs. Clinton in July 1995, she appeared to flatly deny that she had any role in the dismissals. The report also contains some of the grand jury testimony of David Watkins, the White House aide with whom Mrs. Clinton spoke by telephone about making changes in the office. Mr. Watkins was the official who actually dismissed the employees…….In his grand jury testimony on Feb. 8, 1995, Mr. Watkins expanded on observations he made in a 1993 memorandum that he wrote to Thomas F. McLarty III, the former White House chief of staff, in what he called an effort to cleanse his soul. In the memorandum, Mr. Watkins wrote that "there would be hell to pay" if "we failed to take swift and decisive action in conformity with the first lady's wishes." He also wrote that Mrs. Clinton had told him, "We need our people in there."…..In his grand jury testimony, Mr. Watkins said Mrs. Clinton told him "there are too many leftovers that can create and cause us problems."……"

NewsMax.com 10/18/00 Carl Limbacher "…… The evidence that Senate candidate Hillary Clinton gave "factually inaccurate" testimony to Travelgate investigators is overwhelming, independent counsel Robert Ray said in his final report on the 1993 scandal, which he released on Wednesday. But, says Ray, Mrs. Clinton may have actually believed her denials that she didn't order the firing of travel office chief Billy Dale and his six co-workers, undermining any possible prosecution. …….. The independent counsel's decision not to indict in the face of indisputable evidence of Mrs. Clinton's false testimony did not sit well with Billy Dale, who himself was indicted on embezzlement charges to justify his firing. In a statement released by Judicial Watch, the public interest lawfirm that now represents him, Dale said: "I am disappointed by Robert Ray's decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton and others in the Travelgate affair. Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to have me thrown in jail to cover up their corrupt efforts to give the Travel Office's business to their friends. Unsurprisingly, a jury found me innocent of all Hillary Clinton's charges in record time." "Everyone, especially Robert Ray, knows Hillary lied under oath," Dale added, before hinting that he may turn the tables on the Clintons. ……."Despite my 38 years of government service, Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to destroy my good name. They put my wife and me through pure hell. I, along with my lawyers at Judicial Watch, will continue to explore my legal options in holding them accountable."……"

Judicial Watch 10/18/00 "…….Billy Ray Dale issued the following statement in response to the report by the Office of Independent Counsel: I am disappointed by Robert Ray's decision to not prosecute Hillary Clinton and others in the Travelgate affair. Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to have me thrown in jail to cover up their corrupt efforts to give the Travel Office's business to their friends. Unsurprisingly, a jury found me innocent of all of Hillary Clinton's charges in record time. In fact, Bill Clinton himself signed legislation which paid my legal bills. Everyone, especially Robert Ray, knows Hillary Clinton lied under oath about her key role in firing me and my colleagues. It is disappointing that the Office of Independent Counsel, which is charged with enforcing the law, would not prosecute her simply because of a fear of what a Washington, DC jury might do. Of course, the Clinton Justice Department prosecuted me with no evidence of any wrongdoing on my part. Despite my 38 years of government service, Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to destroy my good name. They put my wife and me through pure hell. I, along with my lawyers at Judicial Watch, will continue to explore my legal options in holding them accountable. ……"